Today, a reader shared a case of a judicial judgment of "foundation pit collapse", which is very exciting.
In the process of foundation pit construction of a project in Yunnan, the adjacent police station office building and 10 houses in a community were damaged by foundation sinking and cracking, and at the same time, the surrounding 8 households were partially damaged, resulting in an economic loss of about 40 million yuan.
In 2018, the case went through the judicial process of first instance and second instance, and according to the expert group's Expert Advisory Opinion, the expert group found that the six defendants involved in the construction of the case were all at fault for causing damage to 10 houses in Baima East District.
I don't know if it's lucky or unlucky. The construction unit assumed the main responsibility for the reasons such as construction before examination. In addition, the two sets of drawings provided by the foundation pit design unit allowed the drawing review unit to escape a catastrophe.
The final judgment is that the survey, drawing review and monitoring unit are not liable, but the foundation pit design unit bears 5% responsibility and is sentenced to compensation of about 1.7 million, and the construction unit bears 25% responsibility, the construction unit bears 60% responsibility, and the supervision unit bears 10% responsibility.
But we are all very familiar with the tactics of all parties in this case. It is worth studying and studying well to avoid making similar mistakes, otherwise, whether it can be as lucky as the participating units in this case is two words.
According to the experts organized by the Yunnan Provincial Department of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, the Kunming Municipal Bureau of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, the Xishan District Housing and Urban-Rural Development Bureau and other units, the causes of the damage to the houses in Baima East District and the problems existing in the participating units were analyzed and studied.
1. Cause analysis
1. The damage to the foundation settlement, cracking, and tilting of the 10 houses was caused by the excavation of the deep foundation pit of the No. 5 area reconstruction project of the urban village in Xishan District carried out by the Radio and Television Company.
2. During the excavation of the deep foundation pit of a project, the failure of part of the water interception curtain in the foundation pit (causing the loss of groundwater in the permeable layer such as a large amount of fine sand and round gravel and gravel on the foundation pit wall), the failure of the local support structure (the fracture of some support piles, the decline of the anchoring force of some anchor cables, and the failure of anchor cable anchorage) are the main reasons for the damage caused by foundation settlement, cracking, and house tilting of 10 houses around the foundation pit.
Second, the problems existing in the participating units of the deep foundation pit project
The expert group found that the six defendants involved in the construction were all at fault for causing damage to 10 houses in the eastern district of Baima.
Survey unit of foundation pit support engineering
(1) The investigation is not in accordance with the "Geotechnical Engineering Survey Code" (GB50021-2001), "Building Foundation Pit Support Technical Regulations" (JGJ-2012), "Construction Engineering Geological Exploration and Sampling Technical Regulations" (JGJ/T87-2012) and other specifications and regulations, for the foundation pit to carry out effective and detailed special exploration work. The number of samples is insufficient, the physical and mechanical properties of the compressed layer soil in the foundation pit site are not sampled, and the physical and mechanical properties test of the compressed layer soil in the foundation pit site are not carried out. The proposed parameters of the physical and mechanical properties of the corresponding soil layer are not sufficient.
(2) The investigation of the surrounding environment such as the foundation form and buried depth of the surrounding buildings and structures of the foundation pit is insufficient.
(3) The pre-examination opinions of the foundation pit investigation report and the supplementary investigation report have not been substantially responded to and replied.
The drawing review unit is the pre-review unit of the survey report:
There are problems in the tracking, implementation, and control of the survey unit's response to the pre-review of the survey report. After the survey unit did not make a substantive response and reply to the pre-review of the foundation pit survey report and the supplementary survey report, it did not carry out effective control and control.
Construction drawing design unit of foundation pit support project:
(1) At the same time, two different construction drawings of the supporting structure are provided, and the supporting structure of one is "row pile + inner anchor section reaming pressure dispersion anchor cable + local gusset", and the other part of the supporting structure is "row pile + ordinary tensile anchor cable + local gusset".
Among them, the construction drawings submitted to the construction drawing review unit (drawing review unit) are "row piles + inner anchor section reaming pressure dispersed anchor cable + local gusset", and the construction drawings handed over to the construction unit and the construction unit (construction party) are "row piles + ordinary tensile anchor cable + local gusset".
In the actual construction, the construction unit shall carry out the construction according to the construction drawing of "row pile + ordinary tensile anchor cable + local gusset" that has not been reviewed by the construction drawing review unit.
(2) The design unit did not carry out the work in accordance with the Kunming Municipal Housing and Urban-Rural Development Bureau's "Notice on Further Strengthening the Construction Management of Deep Foundation Pit Engineering" (Kunming Jian [2010] No. 20) that "construction must be carried out in strict accordance with the requirements of the reviewed deep foundation pit design documents, construction plans and relevant technical specifications and standards".
(3) There is no foundation pit excavation diagram in the design document, and the foundation pit support design basis is not sufficient.
(4) In the foundation pit support construction drawings submitted by the design unit, the special requirements for the verticality of the water-stopping pile of the water interception curtain are not clearly marked. According to the design and construction drawings and the current construction drawing specifications, the forking of the long spiral stirring waterproof curtain occlusion pile (the long spiral stirring pile and the supporting pile occlusion form a waterproof curtain) is difficult to avoid. In fact, if the water interception curtain of this foundation pit project is to be successful, the verticality of the waterstop pile needs to be higher than the relevant national specifications.
(5) The major design changes involving the safety of foundation pit engineering, such as "foundation pit seepage control and water-stopping structure reinforcement", "foundation pit yang angle reinforcement", "support pile fracture and disposal", which should have been presided over by the design unit, were completed by the construction unit, which did not meet the requirements of the national capital construction procedure management regulations.
Supervision company
(1) The supervision company did not carry out the supervision work according to the construction drawings. After receiving the construction drawings reviewed by the construction drawing review unit (drawing review unit), the construction unit, the design unit and the construction unit are still ignored after the construction of the unreviewed "row pile + ordinary tensile anchor cable + local gusset" construction drawing, only marked on the drawings received, and the construction unit, design unit and construction unit are not reported to the construction administrative department of the project territory and relevant departments in a timely manner The construction unit, the design unit and the construction unit do not carry out construction according to the reviewed construction drawings.
(2) The supervision company failed to effectively supervise the construction unit to carry out the construction according to the design documents (including drawings) approved by the review; failed to effectively supervise the construction unit and the third-party testing unit to carry out comprehensive construction monitoring in accordance with the provisions of the Technical Specifications for Monitoring of Building Foundation Pit Engineering (GB50497-2009), and failed to effectively supervise the construction unit and the third party to monitor the groundwater level of the foundation pit and the horizontal displacement of the deep soil. The foundation pit is adjacent to important buildings (subways) and pipelines to carry out monitoring, and the construction unit is not effectively urged to set up recharge on the outside of the foundation pit excavation line to control the groundwater level balance.
(3) in August 2012 found that there is a local failure of the foundation pit support, only to the construction unit issued a memorandum on the supervision of the existence of local failure of the foundation pit, in the case of the construction unit without any feedback, do not make effective and decisive decisions, and do not report the behavior of the construction unit to the construction administrative department and relevant departments of the project in a timely manner.
(4) the supervision company is not in accordance with the Kunming Municipal Bureau of Housing and Urban-Rural Development "on further strengthening the construction management of deep foundation pit engineering notice" (Kunming Jian [2010] No. 20) document stipulates that "must be based on the specification, survey report, review opinions, design plan, construction plan and other relevant information documents, combined with the characteristics of deep foundation pit engineering, the development of targeted supervision implementation rules, clear key processes and important parts, to achieve 100% side station, the surrounding environment deformation of the allowable value, early warning value issued an early warning notice, the release rate, The items that need to be inspected and tested as stipulated by regulations, norms and standards must be tracked, supervised and inspected, relevant records must be made, and rectification notices must be issued in a timely manner when problems are found.
That is, the supervision unit did not fully and thoroughly perform the duties of the project site supervision, and failed to achieve 100% side station for key processes such as mud preparation and anchor cable hole formation with the support pile of the supporting pile in December 2012, and the local backpressure backfill of the foundation pit.
(5) the supervision company is not in accordance with the Kunming Municipal Bureau of Housing and Urban-Rural Development "on further strengthening the construction management of deep foundation pit projects" (Kunming Jian [2010] No. 20) document stipulates that "the supervision unit must timely grasp the monitoring data, deep foundation pit engineering in danger or accidents, must immediately report to the local construction administrative departments and relevant departments" to carry out work. After the construction of the deep foundation pit of the No. 5 reconstruction project in Chengzhong Village, Xishan District, caused the foundation settlement, cracking and tilting of 10 houses in Baima East District, the supervision company did not immediately report to the construction administrative department and relevant departments of the project.
(6) The supervision unit's records on the concealed project are chaotic and inconsistent with the construction unit.
(7) In 2011, the excavation of the deep foundation pit of the No. 5 area reconstruction project in Chengzhong Village, Xishan District, caused damage to the office of the surrounding police station, and in August 2012, it was found that there was a partial failure of the foundation pit, and after the foundation pit support pile was broken in December 2012, no decisive measures were taken, and a stop-work order was not issued in time;
The constructor as the construction unit:
(1) Before construction, the investigation of the surrounding environment of the foundation pit (including surrounding buildings and underground pipe network) is not comprehensive and thorough, and the preparation for the impact of foundation pit excavation and support on the surrounding buildings (including surrounding buildings and underground pipe networks) is insufficient.
(2) The construction unit did not carry out effective construction in accordance with the "Construction Organization Design" and the "Safety Special Construction Plan" in the foundation pit excavation and support measures, that is, the construction unit did not set up a recharge well on the outside of the foundation pit excavation line in time to control the groundwater level balance.
(3) The construction unit did not carry out the work in accordance with the Kunming Municipal Housing and Urban-Rural Development Bureau's "Notice on Further Strengthening the Construction Management of Deep Foundation Pit Engineering" (Kunming Jian [2010] No. 20) that "construction must be carried out in strict accordance with the requirements of the reviewed deep foundation pit design documents, construction plans and relevant technical specifications and standards".
(4) The construction unit did not carry out the work in accordance with the Kunming Municipal Housing and Urban-Rural Development Bureau's "Notice on Further Strengthening the Construction Management of Deep Foundation Pit Engineering" (Kunming Jian [2010] No. 20) that "major survey and design and construction plan changes involved in the construction process must be reported to the construction unit to reorganize the expert review, and the review opinions and revised plans must be reported to the safety supervision department for the record", and the construction unit still follows the original "pile row +" construction drawing after receiving the "pile row + ordinary tensile anchor cable + local gusset". The construction organization design and safety special construction plan of the inner anchor section reaming pressure dispersed anchor cable + local gusset were carried out, resulting in the construction basis of the anchor cable being inconsistent with the on-site acceptance;
(5) The construction unit knew that according to the design and construction drawings and the current construction technical specifications, the long spiral stirring waterproof curtain occlusion pile (the long spiral stirring pile and the supporting pile occlusion formed a waterproof curtain) split is difficult to avoid, and there may be a partial failure of the foundation pit water-stopping curtain, and no measures should be taken.
(6) The acceptance record of the concealed project of the construction unit is chaotic and inconsistent with the supervision unit.
(7) The construction unit is not in accordance with the Kunming Municipal Bureau of Housing and Urban-Rural Development "Notice on Further Strengthening the Construction Management of Deep Foundation Pit Engineering" (Kunming Jian [2010] No. 20) document stipulates that "it is necessary to formulate an emergency plan to prevent the collapse of deep foundation pit accidents, and when the collapse of deep foundation pit excavation and enclosure engineering occurs or seriously threatens the safety of surrounding facilities and buildings, it is necessary to immediately start the emergency plan. The supervision unit must take prompt measures to control the development of the situation, prevent secondary accidents, and immediately report to the local construction administrative departments and relevant departments, and it is strictly forbidden to delay or conceal the work of "carrying out the work.
In 2011, the excavation of the deep foundation pit of the No. 5 area reconstruction project in the urban village of Xishan District led to damage to the offices of the surrounding police stations, the fracture of the foundation pit support pile in December 2012, and the large-scale foundation settlement, cracking, and house tilting of 10 houses in the eastern district of Baima from February to April 2013.
The quality inspection station acts as a third-party monitoring unit:
(1) Failure to carry out comprehensive third-party monitoring work in accordance with the provisions of the Technical Specifications for the Testing of Building Foundation Pit Engineering (GB50497-2009) and the third-party monitoring contract signed with the construction unit. That is, third-party monitoring was not carried out in a timely manner in 2011, but only began in March 2011.
(2) Failure to carry out comprehensive third-party monitoring in accordance with the provisions of the Technical Specifications for Testing of Building Foundation Pit Engineering (GB50497-2009). In the case that the monitoring report shows that the tensile force of the anchor cable of the foundation pit support structure continues to decline sharply, no warning documents and reminder materials are provided to the construction unit and other participating units. 2023 Safety Month Information Package
Construction:
(1) Construction before review. The construction of supporting piles began on September 20, 2011, and 84 waterproof piles have been constructed from September 17 to September 23, 2011, and the design and construction drawings of foundation pit support have only passed the review on October 10, 2011.
(2) The design unit provided two different construction drawings of the supporting structure, and the management personnel of the construction unit did not find and stop the construction unit from carrying out construction according to the unreviewed construction drawings.
(3) Failure to strictly perform the contract, resulting in the third-party monitoring unit arbitrarily arranging the start time of the third-party safety monitoring of the foundation pit, resulting in a serious lag in the third-party monitoring work.
(4) In August 2012, after receiving the supervision memorandum of the supervision unit on the existence of local instability in the foundation pit, no reply was given, regardless of the safety of the project. The construction unit did not follow the Kunming Municipal Bureau of Housing and Urban-Rural Development's "Notice on Further Strengthening the Construction Management of Deep Foundation Pit Engineering" (Kunming Jian [2010] No. 20) document stipulating that "it is necessary to formulate an emergency plan to prevent deep foundation pit collapse accidents." In the event of a deep foundation pit excavation enclosure engineering collapse accident or a serious threat to the safety of surrounding facilities and buildings, the emergency plan should be started immediately, and the construction, construction and supervision units must take prompt measures to control the development of the situation and prevent secondary accidents, and immediately report to the local construction administrative departments and relevant departments, and it is strictly forbidden to delay or conceal the work "to carry out the work. In 2011, the construction unit proposed that the deep foundation pit excavation construction of the No. 5 area reconstruction project in Chengzhong Village, Xishan District, led to damage to the surrounding police station office, and the recharge wells around the foundation pit could not be constructed, and the foundation pit support pile was broken in December 2012, and the deep foundation pit excavation construction in March and April 2013 led to the foundation settlement, cracking, house tilting and other major dangers of 10 houses in Baima East District, and the construction unit did not immediately report to the construction administrative department and relevant departments of the project.
3. The Court's decision
First, on the issue of whether the Geological Survey Institute is at fault and whether it should bear the corresponding responsibility
This court believes that it is the duty of the surveyor to conduct the engineering survey in accordance with the national technical specifications, standards, procedures, the employer's power of attorney and technical requirements, and to provide qualified survey results and materials within the specified time, and to be responsible for them. In this case, the Radio and Television Company and the Geological Survey Institute signed the Construction Project Survey Contract, stipulating that the Geological Survey Institute should assess the possible adverse effects of the buildings and environment at or near the survey site, propose reasonable measures to reduce or avoid the defects, and submit them to the employer for evaluation. The survey report and supplementary survey report issued by the geological survey institute are complete, the survey report on the environmental conditions, design and construction plan around the foundation pit should consider the impact of the engineering environment and the surrounding buildings, and the foundation pit excavation is recommended to use the pile + inner support support scheme and the joint support of the deep stirring waterproof curtain to ensure that the surrounding buildings and road pipelines, The safety of the pipe network is clear, and it is required to pay attention to it, but before the survey report of the Geological Survey Institute is approved, the radio and television company has begun the foundation pit construction, and the foundation pit support fails during the construction process, resulting in the damage to the surrounding houses of the foundation sinking has nothing to do with the survey report of the Geological Survey Institute.
The Institute of Geological Survey shall not be liable for compensation.
Second, on the issue of whether Antai Center is at fault and whether it should bear the corresponding liability for compensation
According to this court, Article 11 of the Regulations of the State Council on the Quality Management of Construction Projects: "The construction unit shall submit the construction drawing design documents to the construction administrative department of the people's government at or above the county level or other relevant departments for review. Construction drawing design documents without review and approval, shall not be used". In this case, Antai Center, as the pre-review unit of the survey report (construction drawing), twice issued the Yunshi Review AT2012-055 (1) (2) "Construction Drawing Design Document Review Report" to the Radio and Television Company, and the review opinion was: "The survey report basically complies with the relevant regulations after review, and the report still has deficiencies, and can be used for design after supplementation and modification". If the survey report submitted by the Radio and Television Company fails to pass the review by the Antai Center, and the Radio and Television Company is required to supplement and modify it and then be available for design use, but the Radio and Television Company does not reply, and the construction drawing design documents have not been reviewed and approved, the Radio and Television Company uses the drawings that have not been reviewed and approved for construction, and the construction is carried out without review, which will cause damage consequences.
Aetna Center is not at fault and should not be liable for compensation.
Third, on the issue of whether the Second Investigation Institute is at fault and whether it should bear the liability for compensation
This court believes that Article 52 of the Construction Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that "the quality of survey, design and construction of construction projects must meet the requirements of the relevant national safety standards for construction projects". In this case, the Second Survey Institute, as the construction drawing design unit of the foundation pit support project, must meet the relevant national safety standards for the design of the construction drawings is its legal obligation, and the Second Survey Institute provided two different construction drawings of the supporting structure at the same time, of which the construction drawings submitted to the construction drawing review unit (Antai Center) are one set, and the construction drawings submitted to the construction unit and the construction unit (China Railway Company) are another set. There is no foundation pit excavation diagram in the design document, and the foundation pit payment design is not sufficient. The Second Survey Institute was unable to submit evidence to prove why two different construction drawings of the supporting structures were provided at the same time. At the same time, the Second Survey Institute handed over the major design changes involving the safety of foundation pit engineering, such as "foundation pit seepage control and water-stopping structure reinforcement", "foundation pit yang angle reinforcement", "support pile fracture and disposal", which should have been presided over by the design unit, to the construction unit for design and completion, which did not meet the requirements of the national capital construction procedure management regulations, and the Second Survey Institute was at fault for the occurrence of damage consequences.
shall bear the corresponding liability for compensation.
Fourth, on the issue of whether the supervision company is at fault and whether it should bear the liability for compensation
This court believes that Article 35 of the Construction Law of the People's Republic of China: "If the project supervision unit fails to perform its supervision obligations in accordance with the provisions of the entrusted supervision contract, and fails to inspect the project that should be supervised and inspected or fails to inspect in accordance with the regulations, causing losses to the construction unit, it shall bear the corresponding liability for compensation". The supervision company shall be strictly based on the approved construction drawings for supervision is its legal obligation. The "Expert Advisory Opinions" made it clear that the supervision did not carry out the supervision work according to the construction drawings, and found that the construction unit, the design unit and the construction unit carried out the construction according to the unreviewed construction drawings, and only marked on the drawings received, and did not report to the construction administrative department in a timely manner. In August 2012, after the discovery of local failure of foundation pit support, only to the construction unit issued a memorandum of supervision on the existence of local failure of the foundation pit, in the case of no feedback from the construction unit, do not make effective and decisive decisions, do not report to the construction administrative department in a timely manner, and do not issue a stoppage order in time, the supervision company is at fault for the occurrence of damage consequences,
shall bear the corresponding liability for compensation.
Fifth, on the issue of whether China Railway Corporation is at fault and whether it should bear the liability for compensation
This court held that Article 5 of the Construction Law of the People's Republic of China: "Engaging in construction activities shall abide by laws and regulations, and shall not harm the public interest and the legitimate rights and interests of others" and Article 39: "Construction enterprises shall take measures to maintain safety, prevent dangers, prevent fires, etc., at the construction site; If the construction site may cause damage to the adjacent buildings, structures and special working environment, the construction enterprise shall adopt safety protection measures" and Article 28 of the Regulations on the Administration of Work Safety in Construction Projects: "The construction unit must construct in accordance with the engineering design drawings and construction technical standards, and shall not modify the engineering design without authorization and shall not cut corners." If the construction unit finds that there are errors in the design documents and drawings during the construction process, it shall put forward opinions and suggestions in a timely manner".
China Railway Company, as the construction unit, to ensure the stability and safety of the buildings around the foundation pit it it is its legal obligation, it knows that the construction unit has not obtained a construction permit but still starts construction, using unapproved drawings for construction, "expert advisory opinion", clear China Railway Company, as the construction unit of deep foundation pit excavation, excavation in the foundation pit, Insufficient preparation for the impact of support on the surrounding structures, partial water interception curtain failure in the foundation pit, failure of local support structure, failure to set up recharge wells on the outside of the excavation line of the foundation pit in time to control the balance of groundwater level, resulting in the occurrence of damage consequences, China Railway Company is at fault and should bear secondary liability for compensation.
China Railway Company believes that after the settlement of the Daguan Police Station reached the early warning value, it sent letters to the Radio and Television Company twice requesting that the work be stopped, but the Radio and Television Company replied to the letter to continue the construction, and promised that all the responsibility would be borne by the Radio and Television Company, and that China Railway Company should not be liable for compensation.
This court held that the content of the "Work Contact Letter" submitted by China Railway Company on November 30, 2011 from the Radio and Television Company to China Railway Company: "Regarding the matter proposed by your department to take emergency measures such as suspending work at the west side of the police station, the reply is as follows: the construction of support piles and water-stopping piles will continue to be carried out in this part, and our company will be responsible for any problems" and the content of the "Work Contact Letter" dated December 17, 2011, "Reply on the settlement of the police station, the work of this part will continue to be constructed".
The two "Work Contact Letters" had the signature of "Chen Changrun", the project manager of the radio and television company, and the seal of the "project management department of the radio and television company", and the radio and television company did not recognize the authenticity of the two "work contact letters", and applied for an appraisal of Chen Changrun's signature and the seal of the project management department, and after the trial, the radio and television company withdrew the appraisal application on December 25, 2017 on the grounds that the signatures and seals were difficult to sample, and the radio and television company should bear the legal consequences of failing to produce evidence, so the two "work contact letters" were accepted by this court.
It is proved that after the settlement of the office building of the Daguan Police Station at the beginning of the construction, China Railway Company sent a letter to the Radio and Television Company requesting that the work be stopped, but the Radio and Television Company replied to the letter and promised that all the responsibilities would be borne by the Radio and Television Company, so the Radio and Television Company should bear the main responsibility for the occurrence of the damage consequences. China Railway Company, as the construction party, knew the danger of continuing the construction after the settlement reached the early warning value, and did not report to the relevant departments when the radio and television company did not agree to stop the work in the reply letter, but still continued the construction, until December 3, 2012 and April 19, 2013, the Xishan District Housing and Urban-Rural Development Bureau issued two suspension notices to China Railway Company, and China Railway Company stopped construction, so China Railway Company should bear secondary responsibility for the occurrence of damage consequences.
Sixth, on the issue of whether the quality inspection station is at fault and whether it should bear the liability for compensation
This court held that on October 11, 2011, the Radio and Television Company signed the "Technical Service Contract" with the quality inspection station As a third-party monitoring unit, the purpose of monitoring is to provide warning material data for the radio and television company, from the monitoring report of the quality inspection station, on October 20, 2011, the quality inspection station uses six monitoring means to monitor, and on November 9, 2011, the settlement of the Daguan police station reached the alarm value, after that, other houses have reached the alarm value, and the quality inspection station has provided data to the radio and television company in a timely manner, and the radio and television company recognized in court the receipt of the test report of the quality inspection station, and the quality inspection station has fulfilled the obligation to monitor and provide warning material dataThe quality inspection station is not at fault for the occurrence of damage consequences and shall not be liable for compensation.
Seventh, on the issue of whether the radio and television company is at fault and whether it should bear the liability for compensation
This court believes that Article 7 of the Construction Law of the People's Republic of China: "Before the commencement of a construction project, the construction unit shall, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the state, apply to the construction administrative department of the people's government at or above the county level where the project is located to obtain a construction permit" and Article 11 of the Ministry of Construction's "Regulations on the Quality Management of Construction Projects": "The construction unit shall submit the construction drawing design documents to the construction administrative department of the people's government at or above the county level or other relevant departments for review." Construction drawing design documents without review and approval, shall not be used". In this case, first, the Radio and Television Company, as the construction party, requested the construction party to start construction without obtaining a construction permit, and the Radio and Television Company demanded that the six defendants bear proportional liability for compensation on the basis of the Expert Advisory Opinion. It is clear that the radio and television company, as the construction party, has not been reviewed and approved, and the construction of the supporting pile was started on September 20, 2011, and 84 waterproof piles have been constructed from September 17 to September 23, 2011, and the foundation pit support design and construction drawings have only passed the review on October 10, 2011. In the case of the settlement of the office building of the Daguan Police Station during the construction process, China Railway Company sent a letter to the Radio and Television Company requesting that the work be stopped, but the Radio and Television Company replied to continue the construction and promised that all responsibilities would be borne by the Radio and Television Company, so the Radio and Television Company should bear the main responsibility for the occurrence of the damage consequences, and the Radio and Television Company asserted that it should bear administrative liability, not civil liability。 According to Article 4 of the Tort Liability Law of the People's Republic of China, "the infringer shall bear administrative liability or criminal liability for the same act, which does not affect the tort liability in accordance with the law".
Therefore, the radio and television company shall bear the corresponding civil liability in accordance with the law.
In summary, the Radio and Television Company's claim that the Second Survey Institute, the Supervision Company, and the China Railway Company should bear responsibility has a corresponding factual basis, and this court supports it, and its request for the Geological Survey Institute, Antai Center, and Quality Inspection Station to bear the liability for compensation is not sufficient and this court does not support it.
5% is borne by the Second Survey Institute, which is 1,684,899.64 yuan;
10% is borne by the supervision company for 3,369,799.27 yuan;
25% is borne by China Railway Corporation for 8,424,498.18 yuan,
60% shall be borne by the radio and television company, which is 20,218,795.64 yuan.
![2024 Supervision Engineer Civil Engineering General Practice Formula[fig]]()