Article 1241
If the loss or abandonment of highly dangerous objects causes damage to others, the owner shall bear tort liability. If the owner hands over the highly dangerous goods to another person for management, the manager shall bear the tort liability, and if the owner is at fault, the manager shall be jointly and severally liable.
1. The main purpose of this article
This article is about the tort liability for damage caused by the loss or abandonment of highly dangerous objects.
II. Evolution of the Provisions
Article 123 of the original General Principles of the Civil Law only roughly stipulates the liability for damage caused by the operation of highly dangerous goods, while the original Tort Liability Law distinguishes between different situations, among which Article 74 stipulates the circumstances of damage caused by the loss or abandonment of highly dangerous goods. This article follows the wording of Article 74 of the original Tort Liability Law and remains unchanged.
3. Interpretation of Provisions
This article is a provision on liability for damage caused by the loss or abandonment of highly dangerous objects.
Liability for damage caused by loss or abandonment of highly dangerous objects refers to the tort liability that natural persons, legal persons or unincorporated organizations shall bear for the loss or abandonment of dangerous goods owned, possessed or managed by natural persons, legal persons or unincorporated organizations and causing damage to others after they are lost or abandoned. The principle of no-fault liability applies to this high-risk liability, which includes three types:
(1) Liability for damage caused by the loss of highly dangerous goods. In the case of the loss of highly dangerous goods, the owner has not lost possession of the lost property, and the lost property is still his own property. If the lost dangerous goods cause damage to the infringed party, the owner shall bear the tort liability.
(2) Liability for damage caused by abandonment of highly dangerous goods. If a highly dangerous substance is abandoned, the owner loses ownership of the dangerous goods. When the highly dangerous substance causes harm to others due to its own dangerousness, although the original owner of the abandoned dangerous substance has lost the ownership of the object, the cause of the damage is still done by the discarder, and as long as the dangerous substance is not in the possession of another person, or the other person does not have the right to do so, the original owner of the abandoned object still bears tort liability.
(3) Liability for damage caused by the management of dangerous goods to others. If the owner hands over a highly dangerous substance to another person for management, and the dangerous substance causes damage to others, the manager of the dangerous goods shall bear tort liability, and if the owner of the dangerous goods is at fault, he shall be jointly and severally liable with the manager. The fault of the owner is the failure to exercise a high duty of care when handing over the highly dangerous goods to others, and there is negligence or negligence, such as the nature of the dangerous goods, the method of storage, the dangerous consequences, etc.
4. Cases
Ye Yi v. Xinjiang Petroleum Administration, a dispute over liability for damage caused by loss or abandonment of highly dangerous substances
Facts: Ye Yi was injured by explosives in the Liuhudi Village section of Changshan Town, Midong District, Urumqi City, 500 Trunk Canal, so he sued the court. The court of first instance held that, based on the evidence, it could be determined that the legal fact that the "Swan" brand 45-1-G vibrator column that injured the plaintiff was the one that injured the plaintiff. The defendant, Xinjiang Petroleum Administration, shall bear the burden of proof that the plaintiff Yeyi intentionally caused damages, and if the evidence cannot be adduced, it shall bear the burden of compensation. The court of second instance held that, according to the admissible accident investigation report, the hypocenter in question was sold to the Xinjiang Petroleum Administration for 20 years, during which the Xinjiang Petroleum Administration only argued that it had fulfilled its duty of care and that there was no act of losing or abandoning highly dangerous objects, which was not sufficient to defend the probative force of the investigation report. Therefore, the reason for not being liable for compensation put forward by the Xinjiang Petroleum Administration cannot be established and is not supported.
5. Analysis
In this case, the explosives that injured Zhiyi were the "Swan" brand 45-1-G vibrator column, which was used for geological exploration, and according to the clues provided by the manufacturer, Shanxi Jiangyang Chemical Plant, it can be inferred that the production time of the vibrator column of the Changshanzi 500 Canal in Midong District should be from 1981 to 2001, and the details of the "Swan" brand vibrator column sent to Xinjiang from 1996 to 2001 can be seen The receiving unit of the vibrator column was the Xinjiang Petroleum Administration, so it was determined that the owner of the explosives involved in the case should be the Xinjiang Petroleum Administration. For whatever reason, the highly dangerous substance involved in the case, the "Swan" brand vibrator column was lost from the Xinjiang Petroleum Administration. For the damage caused, the Xinjiang Petroleum Administration, as the original owner, should still bear the tort liability. In the case of liability for harm caused by highly dangerous substances, the legal basis for determining the responsible entity is not entirely whether there is a change in ownership, but who should control the high risk. In the case of highly dangerous goods, whether they are discarded by the owner at will or lost for other reasons, they may cause damage to the public. This is also the reason why Article 1241 of the Civil Code stipulates the tort liability for damage caused by loss or abandonment of highly dangerous objects.