What to do if a personal injury compensation agreement is manifestly unfair

An indemnity agreement manifestly unfair may be rescinded.

Legal analysis: If the contract is obviously unfair, it can be revoked or modified, but it will generally not be determined that the banquet is invalid. One of the parties has the right to request the people's court or arbitration institution to modify or revoke the following contracts: concluded due to a material misunderstanding; manifestly unfair at the time of the conclusion of the contract.

Legal basis: Article 151 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China Where one party takes advantage of the other party's distress or lack of judgment ability, resulting in unfairness in the establishment of a civil juristic act, the injured party has the right to request the people's court or arbitration institution to revoke it.

Legal analysis: If the contract is obviously unfair, it can be revoked or modified, but it will generally not be found to be invalid.

Legal basis: Civil Code of the People's Republic of China

Article 505: The validity of a contract concluded by the parties beyond the scope of business shall be determined in accordance with Section 3 of Chapter VI of Part 1 of this Law and the relevant provisions of this Part, and the invalidity of the contract shall not be confirmed solely on the basis of exceeding the scope of business.

Article 506 The following disclaimers in the contract are invalid:

1) Causing personal injury to the other party;

2) Intentionally or grossly negligently causing damage to the other party's property.

Article 507: If a contract is not effective, invalid, revoked or terminated, it shall not affect the validity of the provisions of the contract on dispute resolution methods. Let the absence be.

The validity of a personal injury compensation agreement shall be determined on the basis of the circumstances.

1) Under normal circumstances, agreements on compensation for personal injuries reached between the parties shall be found to be valid, and neither party may arbitrarily renege on them. In the course of the trial, emphasis shall be placed on reviewing whether there are circumstances that can be revoked or modified, such as fraud, coercion, taking advantage of the danger of others, or obvious unfairness, as well as whether there are invalid circumstances such as violations of legal provisions and the public interest. If the above circumstances do not exist, it shall generally be deemed valid, and both parties shall perform in accordance with the agreement.

It should be noted that, in the case of fairness, the injured party should conduct a substantive review, and should compare the actual amount of loss of the injured party with the amount agreed in the agreement, and if the actual amount of loss obviously exceeds the amount agreed in the agreement, the injured party should be allowed to revoke or change the compensation agreement; On the contrary, if the actual amount of loss is significantly less than the amount agreed in the agreement, the indemnity obligor should also be allowed to revoke or change. The extent to which it can be determined to be "obvious" is within the scope of the judge's discretion, but the author believes that it should not be arbitrarily expanded, and according to the common practice of judicial practice and the general theory of the theoretical circles, it can generally be limited to 30, that is, "more than or less than 30" can be determined to be obviously unfair.

2) A substantive review of the content of the personal injury compensation agreement shall be conducted to find out the true intentions of the parties.

1. If the parties have not clearly agreed on all the compensation matters, but have only reached an agreement on some of the compensation matters, then the compensation obligee may still claim compensation from the compensation obligor for the matters that should be compensated for the matters that should be compensated for the matters that are omitted in the agreement;

2. If the parties do not indicate the detailed compensation matters in the agreement, but only specify the specific amount of compensation that the compensation obligor shall compensate in general, it shall be deemed that the parties have disposed of their substantive rights, as long as the disposition does not violate the provisions of the law and the social public interest, the agreement shall generally be deemed valid, the compensation obligor shall claim rights in respect of the agreement, and the compensation obligor shall only perform its obligations in respect of the agreement.

3. If the parties have specified part of the compensation matters in the agreement, but after examination, the true intention of the parties is to make a general agreement on the entire compensation matters, in this case, the parties can only perform in accordance with the agreement, and the compensation right holder can only claim rights in the agreement. After analyzing the above, we clearly know that the personal injury compensation agreement is invalid, which may be because the agreement is signed in violation of the provisions of relevant laws, resulting in invalidity. However, under normal circumstances, the agreement has legal effect after it is signed by both parties.

The parties need to perform their obligations in accordance with the agreement.

1) The perpetrator has the corresponding capacity for civil conduct;

2) The meaning is genuine;

3) Do not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, and do not violate public order and good customs.

[Law Core and Law Basis Series].Article 143 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China.

Civil juristic acts that meet the following conditions are valid:

1) The perpetrator has the corresponding capacity for civil conduct;

2) The meaning is genuine;

3) Do not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, and do not violate public order and good customs.

1. According to the provisions of China's Civil Code, one of the parties has the right to request the people's court or the arbitration structure to change or revoke the following contracts, one of which is obviously unfair at the time of entering into the contract. Therefore, if a contract is obviously unfair, it is not possible to claim compensation, but to apply to the court or arbitration institution to modify or revoke it.

2. A contract that is obviously unfair refers to a contract that is obviously materially unfavorable to itself when one party enters into the contract due to urgency or lack of experience. For example, if a person borrows usurious loans from others because of the urgent need for medical treatment or business turnover, most of these loan contracts are obviously unfair contracts. Obviously unfair contracts are often extremely unequal in the rights and obligations of the parties, and there is an imbalance in economic interests, thus violating the principle of fairness and reasonableness.

3. Obviously unfair contracts generally have the following legal characteristics:

First, such a contract is manifestly unfair to one of the parties at the time it is concluded. One party has to assume more obligations and enjoy very few rights or suffer significant economic losses, while the other party has to obtain greater benefits at less cost and gain more rights with very few obligations.

Second, a party has obtained benefits that exceed the limits permitted by law.

Thirdly, the injured party lacked experience or urgency at the time of entering into the contract. It can also be said that at the time of the conclusion of the contract, the victim lacked a correct understanding of the content of the act due to his lack of experience.

Articles 147 to 151 of the Civil Code are voidable contracts:

One of the parties has the right to request the people's court or arbitration institution to modify or revoke the following contracts:

1) It was concluded due to a major misunderstanding;

2. Clearly unfair at the time of the conclusion of the contract. If one party concludes a contract contrary to its true intention by means of fraud or coercion or by taking advantage of the danger of others, the injured party has the right to request the people's court or arbitration institution to modify or revoke the contract. Where a party requests a modification, the people's court or arbitration institution must not revoke it.

Article 58 Legal consequences of invalidity or revocation of a contract.

After the contract is invalid or revoked, the property acquired as a result of the contract shall be returned; where it cannot be returned or it is not necessary to do so, compensation shall be made at a discounted price. The party at fault shall compensate the other party for the losses suffered thereby, and if both parties are at fault, they shall each bear corresponding responsibility.

Legal analysis: (1) the signed settlement agreement is obviously unfair;

2) There is a major misunderstanding at the time of signing the agreement;

3) An agreement entered into by one party by means of fraud, coercion or taking advantage of the danger of others, so that the other party may enter into an agreement contrary to its true intentions.

4) One side enters into an agreement by means of fraud or coercion, which harms the interests of the state;

5) The parties to the agreement maliciously collude to harm the interests of the state, the collective, or a third party;

6) The agreement reached is for the illegal purpose of covering the Tongmou Tomb in a lawful form;

7) The agreement reached harms the public interest;

8) The agreement violates the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations.

Legal basis: Civil Code of the People's Republic of China

Article 146:Civil juristic acts carried out by the actor and the counterpart with false expressions of intent are invalid.

The effectiveness of civil juristic acts concealed by false expressions of intent is to be handled in accordance with the relevant legal provisions.

Article 154:Civil juristic acts where the perpetrator maliciously colludes with their counterparts to harm the lawful rights and interests of others are invalid.

Article 155 An invalid or revoked civil juristic act shall not be legally binding from the beginning.

Article 156:Where part of a civil juristic act is invalid, but it does not impact the effectiveness of the other parts, the other parts are still valid.