What happened when a family claim for a deceased person who tripped over a suitcase was denied?

Because the suitcase in a public place is in line with public safety, unless he deliberately knocks you down, or knocks you down with the suitcase, this subjective will to hurt you will need to be compensated.

Or he has a knife protruding in his suitcase, which also has to be compensated, because he does not meet public safety and is not subjectively willing to be compensated.

You can't say that the world revolves around you, and if you trip over the stool and let your mother beat the stool, that's coaxing a child.

The reason is that she tripped over herself in the retrograde, and the lady who dragged the box was walking normally, and she hid after seeing her, but the deceased wanted to step over directly, and she tripped and fell, so it has nothing to do with others, the law is reasonable, and it is reasonable if you are not a victim, and it is also a little back, and you don't know how to trip and fall so badly.

Because she doesn't walk well! Suddenly reversed and walked and waited to see that the suitcase had no time to come down, so she tripped and fell, people were queuing up to check the ticket and get on the bus, the suitcase was within the controllable range, and the hand was still pulling the tow bar. Who's to blame!

If it is rejected, it means that the owner of the suitcase has not been negligent. There is no need to bear the corresponding legal responsibility. The negligence of the act is caused by the person who tripped over the suitcase.

On March 8, 2019, at the entrance of the second floor of the North Square of Beijing West Railway StationMs. Wang was driving in the wrong direction at the turnstile, tripped over Ms. Liu's suitcase, and after 15 days**, Ms. Wang unfortunately passed away. Ms. Wang's family believed that Ms. Liu was grossly at fault and sued for more than 620,000 yuan. On September 29, the Fengtai People's Court made a first-instance judgment in this caseAll claims of Ms. Wang's family were dismissed

The case is still under appeal.

The court said that Ms. Wang's death was indeed regrettable, but the occurrence of the tragic outcome could not be a reason or premise for Ms. Liu to bear tort liability. At the same time, adult family members who accompany the elderly into the station should be given prudent and effective care and attention to the elderly, and timely detection and avoidance of risks.

Because the court ruled that the person who tripped was primarily responsible, it rejected the claim of the deceased family for compensation of 620,000 yuan.

The court will first determine who is at fault and then determine who is liable. If it is denied, it is proved that the party at fault is not on the side of the suitcase.

In the court's view, this act did not have much to do with the owner of the suitcase to some extent. They didn't trip it over with their suitcases, and it wouldn't be fair to them if they were held responsible.

The incident happened on March 8 last year, at the entrance of the second floor of the North Square of Beijing West Railway Station, 67-year-old Ms. Wang was tripped and injured by Ms. Liu's trolley suitcase. At first, she didn't feel anything, but when she got into the car, Ms. Wang felt severe headache, dizziness and other discomforts. At 4:36 p.m., Ms. Wang was unconscious when she got off the train and was pushed off the train in a wheelchair by the police and the attendants.

He was then sent to Shijiazhuang First Hospital, where he was diagnosed with cerebral hemorrhage. Because his condition continued to deteriorate, he finally died in Hebei Youai Hospital 15 days later. As a result, Ms. Wang's family believed that Ms. Liu was at serious fault and sued her to the court.

This case has attracted a lot of attention on the Internet, after all, there are many such things in society. Many people are more concerned about the outcome of the court decision and whether they support the family's view.

After investigation, the court found that the place where the incident occurred was next to the ticket gate at the entrance of the railway station. This position is generally rarely passed by people in the wrong direction. Ms. Wang and her son should pay attention to the retrograde passage and it is their responsibility to pay more attention.

According to the surveillance video, it can be seen that the two do have a certain safety distance, although the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China stipulates that they should bear some responsibility for causing harm to others. However, in this big case, Ms. Liu's behavior was not wrong, and she could not be completely generalized.

In the eyes of many netizens, this case seems to be a bit strong on the side of the family. And Ms. Liu's behavior, in the eyes of many people, is often when riding in the car. It is said that people did not put the car close to their bodies, so they have to bear the mistake, just ask the passengers at the train station, how many people do this?

If Ms. Liu is found guilty in this case and needs to admit relevant responsibility, I am afraid that many people will feel very unconvinced.

The woman tripped over a suitcase and died, and the family's claim of 620,000 yuan was rejected by the court. The reason why the court rejected the plaintiff's claim was mainly because after a detailed investigation, the court determined that Liu was not at fault, but that Wang ran into Liu retrograde and should "pay" for the consequences.

After the case spread on the Internet, it received widespread attention, and as soon as the verdict of this case, known as "suitcase", came out, netizens were hotly discussed. The focus of netizens' discussion is naturally why did the plaintiff sue? After all, judging by what happened, it seems that the main responsibility lies with them!

If it weren't for them going backwards, if it weren't for a young man letting an old man chase after him, how could it have led to a tragedy. The plaintiff's lawsuit made netizens puzzled! The court's judgment further confirmed the thoughts of netizens, that is, the plaintiff should really reflect on it and find his own reasons.

In public, we should obey the established order, violating the order, causing consequences, and the act of putting the blame on others is not advisable! Looking at the course of the incident, Liu did her duty to Wang's fall, and her behavior of asking and dialing 120 for the first time was already a very benevolent act!

Indict. Is it justified for whoever sues? The answer, of course, is no!

It's like Wang tripped over a suitcase and died, this case was sued by Wang's family, but the final verdict was that they lost the case! The reason why they lost the lawsuit is naturally because there is a situation of strong words, obviously they are blaming Chenmin, but they want to completely put the responsibility on the other party, which is embarrassing! Fortunately, the law is fair and just, and the case has been tried and fairness and justice have been returned to Liu.

Common sense. There is some common sense involved in this case, that is, we must obey the traffic rules in public places, and there is an accident between normal walking and wrong-way driving, and the difference in judgment is very large!

The woman tripped over the luggage pie and died, and the family's claim of 620,000 was rejected by the court, and netizens praised the draft as the court's judgment!

Mainly because the defendant is not at fault at all, and there is no major fault, the court believes that the occurrence of such a result cannot be a reason for the defendant to bear tort liability, or a premise, it is also because there is no one to take care of the old man, so it will lead to this incident.

The family's request was unreasonable, and it also affected social stability and would have a bad impact, so the other party's request was rejected.

The court said that Ms. Wang's death was indeed regrettable, but the occurrence of the tragic outcome could not be a reason or premise for Ms. Liu to bear tort liability. At the same time, the adult family members of the rotten cherry blossoms who accompany the elderly in the station should give the elderly prudent and effective attention to the laughter, and discover and avoid risks in time.

It's the old man's fault, although the old man passed away very sorry, but the chain calendar wheel is not unreasonable for us, because I also saw this bad disgust, because the old man didn't see the shed letter suitcase, and took the initiative to hit the suitcase.

It's the owner of this suitcase. Of course, this old man also needs to take responsibility, after all, he didn't see the road clearly. So the family and the owner of the box should each take half.

It also depends on where the elderly stumble, and the judgment can be made according to the corresponding law, depending on the nature of the matter.

The owner of the suitcase is not directly at fault.

The old man's fault. This case was on August 18, 2020**, during the trial, the owner of the suitcase, Ms. Liu, said that she was not at fault in this incident, because she was queuing up normally to enter the station, and Ms. Wang, who fell, was accidentally tripped in the wrong direction.

Netizens who watched the surveillance footage at that time should also have the same idea as Ms. Liu, the owner of the suitcase, obviously Ms. Liu was queuing up normally at the time, and she didn't move too much, standing there properly, and the suitcase was also properly pulled behind her. When Ms. Wang walked in the opposite direction from the entrance of the station, there was actually a vacant space next to it, but she did not go around the side, and directly attached to Ms. Liu and wanted to step over the suitcase, but failed to cross it smoothly, resulting in a fall.

But for this incident, the verdict was not pronounced in court during the trial, but in the hearts of most netizens, I believe that the views are the same, believing that the owner of the suitcase, Ms. Liu, is not at fault, and the family of Yanhe also wants to take advantage of the fact that the old man tripped over the suitcase after the old man has passed away, and claim 620,000 yuan from the owner of the suitcase.

Irrationality!

First of all, I would like to express my sincere condolences to Ms. Wang, who unfortunately passed away due to tripping over her suitcase.

Looking back on this incident, we can see that it was all an accident and had nothing to do with the owner of the suitcase, Ms. Liu.

The cause of this incident was that Ms. Wang was in a hurry to find her son, and it was noted that Ms. Wang was traveling in the wrong direction at this time, and because she was eager to find her son, she walked faster, so she accidentally tripped over the suitcase.

It can be seen from this that Ms. Liu is not responsible in this matter. It would be unreasonable to accuse Ms. Liu of not putting her suitcase on the ground so that the tragedy would not have happened.

As a rule of law, there is no rule that says that people cannot leave their suitcases on the ground at railway stations; From the perspective of social sense, it makes more sense for people to put their suitcases on the ground.

Therefore, Ms. Liu was not at fault at all, but Ms. Wang's family claimed a huge sum of 620,000 yuan, which was too much.

Moreover, if it is really necessary to investigate the fault and investigate the responsibility, the responsibility of Ms. Wang's family will be greater than that of Ms. Liu in any case. When Ms. Wang tripped and fell, Ms. Wang's family did not send Ms. Wang to the hospital in time, but only sent her to the hospital five hours after the injury was serious, which undoubtedly delayed the best time. If Ms. Wang's family had taken Ms. Wang to the hospital the moment she tripped and fell, it would have been possible to avoid this tragedy.

Now, instead of reflecting on their own mistakes, Ms. Wang's family has opened their mouths to claim compensation from the innocent Ms. Liu, which is quite slanderous. Do these family members still want to use Ms. Wang, who has unfortunately passed away, to seek improper benefits for themselves?

I hope that through the strict investigation of ** and the fair judgment of the judge, Ms. Liu can be returned to her innocence!

I think it's unreasonable, because anyone has the right to put their own things in one place.

I don't think it's reasonable, after all, it was the woman who went against the grain first, she didn't look at the road, she accidentally moved to someone else's suitcase, and her son didn't take the woman to the hospital in time after the injury.

Irrationality! Because it was not the fault of the owner of the suitcase, the suitcase was left there, and the person who tripped over fell without seeing clearly, and he should be primarily responsible.

Not at all reasonable. The box was placed there, and it wouldn't move, and the woman tripped without looking at the road, so she couldn't blame the owner of the box at all.

In fact, this is unreasonable, because the person actually did not see himself tripping over the suitcase.

From an outsider's point of view, this makes sense. The owner of the suitcase was in a normal queue and was not at fault. It is mainly the deceased who went against the road and did not look at the road and fell.

The reason for the dismissal was that the cause of the accident was caused by her own retrograde driving, so the court rejected the family's claim for compensation.

In the case of Ms. Wang's death by tripping over a suitcase, the court rejected the family's claim and gave the reason not to support the claim on the grounds that there was no direct causal relationship between Ms. Wang's cause of death and tripping over the suitcase. After investigation, the court found that Ms. Wang was old and had many underlying diseases, and her family members did not fulfill their duty of care when they went out to take a flight, which was the main factor in the tragedy.

The reason for the dismissal was that it could not be determined that her death was directly related to Ms. Liu, and that the deceased was a retrograde resulter, which had nothing to do with Ms. Liu.

From an objective point of view, the death of the tripping family member is not directly related to the tripping process, and his children should have the duty of care, but they did not fulfill their responsibilities, which led to the tragedy.

The court said that Ms. Wang's death was indeed regrettable, but the occurrence of such a result could not be a reason or premise for Ms. Liu to bear tort liability. At the same time, accompanying the elderly into the station should take good care of the elderly at all times.

The fault is not with the suitcase owner. Ms. Liu, the owner of the suitcase, was queuing normally; The deceased, Ms. Wang, did not pay attention to herself, kicked the suitcase and tripped over her death, so the claim was dismissed.

Tripping over a suitcase and dying is an accidental injury, and although the suitcase has an owner, it is not intentional by its owner. What we need to do is to plan the public safety facilities properly.