Right to life and health case

Right to Life and Health Case-Right to Life and Health Case: What is the value of the right to life and health? The plaintiff promised, male, 9 years old, a student of No.1 Primary School, Beilishi Road, Xicheng District, Beijing. Its legal representatives are Xu (father) and Sun Shuzhi (mother). Defendant: Beijing Urban Architecture Design and Research Institute. Its legal representative is President Wang Xinjie. The reason for damages is that 1996+65438, at noon on February 6th, his toys fell into the warehouse next to the substation room of Beijing Urban Construction Design and Research Institute. When he went to the room to pick up the toys, the defendant unit failed to install protective facilities and obvious warning signs on the outdoor high-voltage cable head of 10kV, which caused him to be caught by the high-voltage cable head and burn his arm for life. Therefore, a lawsuit was filed with Beijing No.1 Intermediate People's Court, demanding that the defendant compensate for various economic losses and prosthetic expenses totaling 2.95 million yuan. The defendant argued that the high-voltage cable head promised by the plaintiff should be maintained by Beijing Power Supply Bureau, which should be responsible for the damage caused by its subjective negligence and objective inaction, and promised to climb the roof of the distribution room of the fourth branch of Beijing Municipal Engineering Bureau through illegal buildings, so the fourth municipal company should also be responsible for the promised disability. Therefore, Beijing Urban Construction Design and Research Institute has neither subjective fault nor illegal behavior in committing electric shock injury, and does not agree with the plaintiff's commitment lawsuit request. The court found through trial that at noon on February 6th, 1996 65438+ promised to pass the substation room of Beijing Urban Construction Design and Research Institute. Because I promised to pick up toys with my classmates on the roof of the substation, I promised to be injured by the exposed 10 kV high-voltage cable head on the roof. After beijing jishuitan hospital's treatment, he was diagnosed as "15% ⅲ-ⅳ degree electric burn of both upper limbs and amputation of the middle part of both upper limbs". 1April, 1996, appraised by Beijing Science and Technology Court as: "The promised loss is electric burn of both upper limbs. At present, the lack of upper limbs below the middle of the upper arm seriously limits their future life, study and work. The ability to work promised by the appraiser was completely lost. " The plaintiff's legal representative has paid 22,400 yuan for medical expenses, 3,488.43 yuan for his father's lost time and 300 yuan for appraisal. Proved by Beijing Prosthetic Factory, it promises to replace the prosthesis once a year before 18 years old, and once every three years between 18 years old and 73 years old. It costs 80,000 yuan to replace the prosthesis. Prosthetic replacement cost * * * 3.36 million. At present, Beijing Urban Construction Design and Research Institute has paid the promised legal representative 6.5438+0.2 million yuan for living expenses. In addition, Beijing Urban Construction Design and Research Institute is the property owner of the high-voltage cable head promised by the injured. During the trial, the Law and Regulation Department of the Ministry of Electric Power replied to the court that the civil liability occurred on the power supply equipment was borne by the owner of the power supply equipment, and the safe distance of the power supply equipment was lower than the requirements stipulated in the standard, so a fixed barrier should be installed. Water and electricity regulations of the Ministry of Electric Power (85). 6 1 Technical Code for Design of High-voltage Power Distribution Equipment stipulates that the safe clear distance of outdoor power distribution equipment and the distance between the live part and the edge of buildings and structures should not be less than 2.2m According to the actual measurement, the distance between the external dew point of high-voltage cable and the edge of power distribution room maintained by Beijing Urban Construction Design and Research Institute is1.2m.10kV, and no fixed obstacles are installed at the cable head of the high-voltage line. The above facts are proved by the statements of the two parties, the hospital diagnosis certificate, the plaintiff's medical bills, the forensic appraisal conclusion and the reply from the Law Department of the Ministry of Electric Power Industry. The court held that citizens have the right to life and health and the right to claim compensation from the infringer. To judge whether the life and health of the parties have been infringed by their actions or omissions, the existence of damage facts should be taken as the basis of civil liability. Beijing Urban Construction Design and Research Institute believes that the power supply supervision department of Beijing Power Supply Bureau should bear the responsibility, on the grounds that the high-voltage cable head and ancillary facilities that caused the plaintiff to promise to get an electric shock were installed by the power supply department, and the electrical project of replacing the cable head was accepted by the Beijing power supply supervision department since then. The power supply supervision department has never raised any objection to the defendant since it was electrified for 23 years. The power supply supervision department's supervision over the power consumption of power users is an inspection activity for high-voltage power users. If it is found that it does not meet the requirements, it will notify the property right unit to improve it according to law. Laws and regulations do not require the power supply supervision department to actually perform the obligations related to this behavior instead of the property right unit of high-voltage facilities. In this regard, the Ministry of Electric Power clearly stipulates that the civil liability of power supply equipment or lines shall be determined according to the principle of ownership of power supply equipment or lines. Who owns the property rights of the existing power supply equipment or lines, and who bears the relevant responsibilities that occur on the equipment or lines? The high-voltage cable head causing the promised electric shock belongs to the incoming part of the power supply line of Beijing Urban Construction Design and Research Institute, and is also a part of the user's high-voltage power receiving device, and its property right belongs to Beijing Urban Construction Design and Research Institute. It should be pointed out that if the safety distance of power facilities is obviously lower than the standard due to historical reasons, power users should install fixed isolation barriers and warning signs in accordance with the requirements of the National Technical Code for Design of High Voltage Distribution Equipment to ensure safety. However, the defendant did not perform his duties seriously and did not pay attention to the dangerous situation that should be foreseen, which eventually led to the promised electric shock disability. The causal relationship in this case exists objectively, and the defendant Beijing Urban Construction Design and Research Institute should bear the main responsibility.