The 67 year old aunt tripped and fell on a billboard and sued the hotel and the property

Mondo Social Updated on 2024-01-31

On March 25, 2023, in an office building, Ms. Gong, 67, was tripped and injured by a billboard around the corner when she got out of the elevator, resulting in a femur fracture in her right leg.

Half a year later, Ms. Gong sued the property management company and the catering company that placed the billboards, demanding that the two defendants pay 56,000 yuan for medical expenses and other losses.

But the four paragraphs she provided to the court** did not capture her specific fall injury, and Judge Bai Yun and his colleagues first went to the scene to transfer after reviewing the plaintiff's evidence.

Because at the time of the incident, the camera facing Ms. Gong's fall was too far away, and at the same time as she fell, there happened to be a pedestrian passing by, blocking the moment of her fall.

The judge searched for the surveillance probe of a nearby business at the scene and found that the surveillance at the place where the accident occurred had long been damaged. The judges then approached the building's property management department, learned about the size of the billboard involved, measured some data from the place of the incident, and prepared it for a week.

On December 14, 2023, the Jing'an District People's Court** heard the case. 1. The property management company as defendant 1 stated that Ms. Gong had no direct evidence of falling, claiming that the other party was prone to falls because she had undergone surgery on her lumbar spine. The plaintiff, Ms. Gong, said that her surgery was done in 2018 and that there was no impact at the time of the incident.

The catering company involved as the second defendant stated that it was not responsible. Ms. Gong said that the two defendants' attitude of not caring about themselves caused double physical and mental harm. Ms. Gong's lawyer argued that the second defendant, the catering enterprise, had unshirkable liability. In particular, they set up the base of the billboard, which directly tripped Ms. Gong. In this regard, the restaurant firmly denied that there was a potential safety hazard in the installation of the billboard, while the property management company believed that the restaurant violated the regulations by placing the billboard.

As property managers of office buildings, they believe that they have fulfilled their responsibility to dissuade. The property said that the details of how Ms. Gong fell needed to be explained by the plaintiff. In response to the plaintiff's right foot that he had tripped over the left side of the billboard at the time of the incident, the plaintiff believed that his left foot had inadvertently stepped over the base of the billboard at the time of the incident, and that his right foot had fallen at a right angle to the base because he had not been able to cross it. In the judge's view, the plaintiff had a duty of insufficient care in the accident.

During the process, the parties agree to mediation. While Judge Bai Yun was communicating with the plaintiff, Judge Peng Chunxiao was also actively communicating with the two defendants.

However, the plaintiff insisted that the two defendants pay 56,000 yuan, including 26,000 yuan for medical expenses. Defendant 1 stated that the property management company could not do everything and was unwilling to take responsibilityThe second defendant was only willing to pay 1,000 yuan in condolence money.

The two sides failed to mediate, and recently, the Jing'an District People's Court made a first-instance judgment on this case. The court held that the plaintiff had failed to exercise its duty of care when passing by the corner, and was liable for 20% of its own damages after removing part of the costs raised by Ms. Gong. If the defendant catering company and the property management company, as the operators and managers of the business premises, fail to fulfill their safety and security obligations, and cause damage to the plaintiff, they shall bear tort liability. Therefore, it was decided that the defendant catering company should bear 80% of the liability and pay more than 36,000 yuan in compensation, and the defendant property company should bear 20% of the supplementary liability, that is, more than 7,000 yuan.

Take a look at the news knews reporter: Gu Haidong Zhao Yiyun.

Related Pages