Beibei's parents appealed, and the Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court recently held that Zhou, who was standing on the roadside at the time of the incident, had fulfilled his duty of care, dismissed the appeal and upheld the original judgment.
Hit an old man with a bike? Causing his tenth disability.
The reporter learned that the court of first instance found out that on June 2 last year, Beibei (born in 2005), aged 10, rode a bicycle from south to north along the road surface of Huadu Lake Greenway in Xinhua Street, Huadu District. Because he did not keep a safe riding distance, he collided with Zhou standing on the side of the road, causing Zhou to be injured.
According to the Certificate of Road Traffic Accident issued by Huadu Brigade of the Traffic Police Detachment of Guangzhou Public Security Bureau, it is determined that Beibei is fully responsible for the accident and Zhou is not responsible. Beibei is a person with limited capacity for civil conduct and her parents are her legal guardians.
After the accident, Zhou was diagnosed as comminuted fracture of distal left radius, styloid process fracture of left ulna and senile osteoporosis. Ask for leave for three months according to the doctor's advice, and accompany one person during hospitalization. Appraised by the Judicial Appraisal Center of Southern Medical University, the degree of disability caused by the comminuted fracture of the left upper limb and the distal end of the left radius and the styloid process of the left ulna is grade 10.
In the meantime, he was hospitalized for 40 days a week and needed follow-up rehabilitation treatment, resulting in medical expenses of 46,005.2 yuan. Beibei's father * * * paid 36,654 yuan for weekly medical expenses, and paid1.2000 yuan for nursing and maintenance. Teacher Zhou, retired in May 20 13.
The court of first instance held that the responsibility for this accident was confirmed by the traffic police department, and Beibei took full responsibility for this accident, but Zhou did not take responsibility. Beibei's parents advocated that Zhou, as an adult, should pay attention to traffic safety. Beibei is a minor, and Zhou should bear 60% of the responsibility, but there is no evidence to support it and it will not be adopted. Beibei's parents are legal guardians and should be responsible for Beibei's minor infringement.
After calculation, the weekly losses total 100045 yuan (the self-paid part of medical expenses is 935 1 yuan; Disability compensation 695 14 yuan; Spiritual consolation money 10000 yuan; Hospital food subsidies, nutrition fees, nursing fees, etc. 8700 yuan. ), and the loss shall be compensated by Beibei, deducting 12000 yuan paid by Beibei's parents to Zhou. The court of first instance ruled that Beibei and her parents jointly compensated 88,045 yuan per week.
The old man stood by the road? Have done their duty.
Beibei's father appealed, and the first instance found that it was improper to take full responsibility. Huadu Lake, where traffic accidents occurred, is a leisure greenway integrating sightseeing, sightseeing, fitness and entertainment. There is a single lane paved with asphalt for passengers to ride and a sidewalk for pedestrians to visit. Zhou is a teacher who has been engaged in education for many years. In such an environment with many people and bicycles, he should have the basic duty of safety care, especially when walking or standing in a single lane. Therefore, Zhou was also at fault in this traffic accident and should bear 60% of the liability for compensation. The court of first instance ruled that the mental consolation money 10000 yuan was unreasonable and had no legal basis.
The court of second instance held that the traffic police department had identified the responsibility for the traffic accident on the day of the accident, and determined that Beibei was fully responsible for the accident and Zhou was not responsible. Beibei and her father have signed the Letter of Confirmation of Road Traffic Accidents, without raising any objection or applying for reconsideration. Therefore, it is not improper for the original judgment to determine the responsibility sharing.
Beibei's father appealed that Zhou walked or stood in a single lane and failed to fulfill his duty of safety care. However, according to the road traffic accident certificate, Zhou Zheng was standing on the side of the road when the accident happened. As a pedestrian, he has fulfilled his duty of care, so the court refused to adopt Beibei's father's opinion.
About Beibei's father's demand for transportation expenses and compensation for mental damage. The court held that Zhou, as a retired old man in this case, suffered from two fractures, resulting in grade 10 disability, and transportation expenses and mental pain were bound to occur during treatment and rehabilitation. The original judgment did not improperly identify the transportation fee and mental damage compensation, and the court confirmed it.
In addition, the vehicle involved in this case is a bicycle, which is not a motor vehicle. Therefore, the original judgment identified the cause of the case as a "motor vehicle traffic accident dispute" and the court corrected it. To sum up, the first-instance judgment found that the facts were clear and the applicable law was correct, and the court upheld it.
Although it was an accident, it did cause harm to the elderly, and positive compensation is the right way.