What is the liability of a private enterprise for serious injuries caused by employees beating each

1.In this case, the enterprise is not liable, because during working hours, if a dispute between employees due to improper joking results in a serious injury, it is impossible to recognize it as a work-related injury according to the Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance. The following is the full text of the Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance on the determination of work-related injuries.

Article 14 An employee shall be deemed to have suffered a work-related injury under any of the following circumstances:

1) Being injured in an accident during working hours and in the workplace due to work-related reasons;

2) Being injured in an accident while engaging in work-related preparatory or finishing work in the workplace before or after working hours;

3) Injured by violence or other accidents during working hours and in the workplace due to the performance of work duties;

4) Suffering from occupational diseases;

5) Injured or unaccounted for in an accident while away for work;

6) Being injured in a motor vehicle accident while commuting to or from work;

7) Other circumstances that laws and administrative regulations provide shall be recognized as work-related injuries.

Article 15 An employee shall be deemed to have suffered a work-related injury under any of the following circumstances:

1) Died of a sudden illness during working hours and at work, or died within 48 hours after rescue efforts failed;

2) Suffering harm in emergency rescue and disaster relief or other activities to preserve national or public interests;

3) Employees who previously served in the army, were disabled due to war or duty injuries, and have obtained the certificate of revolutionary disabled soldiers, and were injured after arriving at the employer.

Where employees have any of the circumstances in items (1) or (2) of the preceding paragraph, they shall enjoy work-related injury insurance benefits in accordance with the relevant provisions of these Regulations; Employees who have the circumstances in item (3) of the preceding paragraph shall enjoy work-related injury insurance benefits other than a one-time disability subsidy in accordance with the relevant provisions of these Regulations.

Article 16 In any of the following circumstances, an employee shall not be deemed to have suffered a work-related injury or be treated as a work-related injury:

1) Due to a crime or violation of the administration of public security**;

2) Drunkenness causes **;

3) Self-harm or suicide.

2.An employee who has been seriously injured can only claim that the person who caused the injury bear the corresponding civil liability.

Article 119 of the General Principles of the Civil Law: Where a citizen's body is infringed upon and injuries are caused, compensation shall be made for medical expenses, loss of income due to lost work, living allowances for the disabled, and other expenses; where death is caused, funeral expenses and support for the deceased during his lifetime shall be paid.

necessary living expenses and other expenses.

The employer is not at fault and has no responsibility.

Even if there is a conflict due to work problems at work, the parties should report to the unit leader in a timely manner, and should not quarrel and fight, and the serious consequences of the victim's injury are directly caused by the fight and have nothing to do with the performance of duties.

Violent brawls are violations of labor discipline and are not considered work-related injuries to the victims.

The employer is not liable.

The unit should bear part of the liability, after all, due to its mismanagement. In addition, the party responsible for the accident should bear the primary responsibility for compensation. As for the amount of compensation, it can be settled through negotiation or litigation.

Legal Analysis: If an employee fights and injures someone due to work, the employer should be held liable. Because the law stipulates that a labor relationship is formed between individuals, and the party providing the labor service causes damage to others due to the banquet and labor service, the party receiving the labor service shall bear the tort liability.

Legal basis: Article 1192 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China Where a labor relationship is formed between individuals, and the party providing the labor services causes damage to others due to the labor services, the party receiving the labor services shall bear tort liability. After the party receiving the service bears tort liability, it may recover compensation from the party providing the service intentionally or with gross negligence.

If the party providing the service suffers damage due to the service, it shall bear the corresponding liability according to the fault of both parties.

During the period of providing labor services, if the act of a third party causes damage to one party for providing labor services, the party providing labor services has the right to request the third party to bear tort liability, and also has the right to request the party receiving labor services to compensate. After receiving compensation from the labor party, it may seek compensation from a third party.

1. Should A be liable for compensation?

Need to bear. Reason: According to the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Personal Injury Compensation Cases, which came into effect on May 1, 2004 (Article 9, Paragraph 1), "If an employee causes injury to another person in the course of employment activities, the employer shall be liable for compensation; If an employee intentionally or grossly negligently causes damages, he shall be jointly and severally liable with the employer for compensation.

If the employer bears joint and several liability for compensation, it may recover compensation from the employee. This provision is known as employer liability. Therefore, A, as the employer, must be liable for compensation.

C suffered minor injuries and received two stitches on his head. A only needs to compensate him within the scope of the law: ** expenses, nursing fees, nutrition expenses, lost work expenses, etc., and will not increase the expenses you need to bear because C refuses to be discharged from the hospital or his mother continues to be hospitalized.

A can solve the problem in three ways: first, A and C can negotiate a solution on their own; Second, by inviting the local police station, or a third party such as a neighborhood committee or village committee, to help negotiate a solution; Third, it should be resolved through legal litigation.

Best of luck!

There are too many people who don't know how to pretend to understand, and I really can't stand it.

1. Employees engage in activities unrelated to work, the employer does not need to be held responsible, fighting is a typical non-work-related activity, is it possible that B killed C in order to solicit customers, and A also became a murderer, soliciting customers is work, and fighting is definitely not work.

2. C is a typical unreasonable demand, and the losses caused by refusal to leave the hospital shall be borne by him, and the reasonable losses shall also be borne by B, and as for his mother's hospitalization, there is no basis for compensation. A did not have any joint and several liability, and went through the legal process normally, and C received very little compensation, and the court would not support his unreasonable claim. Minor injuries are very minor injuries and do not constitute any disability, and level 9 and 10 are pure nonsense.

If B does not compensate, he may be detained by the public security and released after a few days.

I have encountered such a thing, work disputes caused by comminuted fractures, **6 months, for minor injuries, disability identification level 9, the other party's personal and company are unwilling to pay, through the legal judgment, the other party personally bears criminal liability, one year imprisonment, the other party and the company bear civil liability, the company is jointly and severally liable, enforced.

There are a few things to look out for.

The dispute between B and C is related to soliciting customers, which can be found to be an act of duty in court.

1. Injury: If the injury is slight, the compensation will not be too high, and if the lawsuit is filed, A will be jointly and severally liable.

2. The issue of C-mother should not be directly related to this case, but it will be one of the factors considered by the police.

3 This case only has minor injuries, the criminal law cannot enter the lawsuit at all, the civil lawsuit is of little significance, and the money lost will not be too much, and the police mediate well. The cost of compensation varies from place to place.

It is very troublesome to fight a civil lawsuit. It takes a lot of time and energy, and in your case, it is better to mediate if you are not disabled.

I feel that I should bear it, and A should persuade in the event of a dispute. If it depends on the favor, B is helping A.

1. To see whether B is engaged in employment activities under the instruction of A, although during the working period, if the dispute between B and C is not related to B's employment activities, A shall not be liable for compensation.

2. You should see what the disability level is before calculating the cost. Judging from the slight injury, it is estimated that it is about the same as the tenth to the ninth level, and it will not bear a lot of money without considering that Party C is also at fault. Because I don't know your local standards, it's hard to estimate.

Minor injuries cannot reach the disability level at all, and the subject amount of compensation will not be too high. There is no direct causal relationship between the case and this incident, and at most it is only a factor to consider. If the dispute between B and C is related to soliciting passengers, then A will be jointly and severally liable.

The police should come forward in this matter, let the police mediate first, and see what the amount is. In the case of a lawsuit, there is no disability compensation for minor injuries, mainly for C's lost work expenses and medical expenses, and what can be changed is the so-called mental compensation.

1.Personally, I think that although C was injured for work, it was B who injured the person after all, but since it was in A's shop, I think that A and B should each be held half responsible if they did not persuade their employees to have a business conflict with C.

2.Regarding the cost, I don't think I need to compensate for the cost of Mother C, although it is caused by A and B, but Mother C can't afford this blow because of her body and people's ability to bear it. So in this way, the reward will not be more.

Legally, A should be liable for compensation because B is your employee.

However, after assuming the liability for compensation, A has the right to pursue the liability from B, and may require B to bear part or all of the liability.

This is unfair competition, and both parties are responsible! Do you have a hands-on fight? If you don't fight, it's better, and if you do, there will be a problem! This kind of thing is caused by unfair competition! How does the police station mediate?

Yes, because it was the employer's employee who injured the person

Personally, I think the problem is whether the boss directs it.

If an employee beats C to death, will A also be sentenced?

However, due to moral concerns, A should also pay compensation. After all, it is because of their work that employees have disputes and fights.

Require A to bear the medical expenses incurred as a result.

Employers must bear certain responsibilities.

A does not need to be compensated.

Find a lawyer.

Go to court to find a legal solution.

I think you will be jointly and severally liable for medical expenses.

Responsible, at least B's medical expenses A is responsible.

You are held accountable.

Legal Basis Article 9 Where an employee causes injury to another person in the course of employment activities, the employer shall be liable for compensation; If an employee intentionally or grossly negligently causes damages, he shall be jointly and severally liable with the employer for compensation. If the employer bears joint and several liability for compensation, it may recover compensation from the employee.

"Engaging in employment activities" as used in the preceding paragraph refers to engaging in production and business activities or other labor activities within the scope authorized or instructed by the employer. Where an employee's conduct exceeds the scope of authorization, but its expression is in the performance of duties or is intrinsically related to the performance of duties, it shall be found to be "engaging in employment activities".

You didn't instruct him to beat him, how can you compensate for it, what's wrong if you don't fight, who is it for the accidental injury? Whoever fights will pay for it, and if you can't be hospitalized, you deserve it, and the court will punish you according to the injury!

1.I don't take it!

2.There is no need to take the legal route.

For legal issues, it is better to check the relevant information, or consult a lawyer

Hello: The company should not be held responsible, China's law only stipulates that minors in schools and other educational institutions cause ** or are injured by a third party to bear the corresponding responsibility. Therefore, your company should not bear the responsibility for the struggle caused by the personal reasons of the employees.

I have seen many reports in the factory dormitory that people are fighting due to trivial matters, and the factory has to take responsibility. So, I don't think your family's responsibilities can run away. There is a term called "humanitarian relief".

If the business license of your billiard room is still in the process of being processed, the industrial and commercial department will pay a fine if it finds it. This is an illegal operation (o).

You are not liable for civil or criminal liability. The perpetrators are responsible.

If it is only a fight between employees for personal reasons, and is not caused in the course of performing duties, then the company does not need to be liable, and all responsibilities are borne by the infringer.