Image network reporter Mu Jiaxuan correspondent Chen Mengjiao Fang Shu

The 25-year-old boy took a bath in the bathroom of the rental house and died of electric shock due to electric leakage of the water heater. The boy’s parents took the landlord to court and asked the defendant to compensate more than one million yuan. After the hearing, Jinshui court decided that the defendant and the victim should bear 50% of the responsibility according to the facts, the causes of the accident and the consequences of the damage. According to the law, the defendant was ordered to compensate the plaintiff for various losses totaling more than 430000 yuan. After the sentence was pronounced, neither the plaintiff nor the defendant appealed, and the case has taken effect.

Basic case

In 2019, the victim Zhang came to work in Zheng and rented a house owned by the landlord yuan through a housing custody company. He lived with his girlfriend Zheng and shared the same bathroom with other tenants. Later, the landlord and the trusteeship company dissolved the trusteeship relationship. After the expiration of the lease, although the victim did not re sign a written contract with the landlord, his girlfriend Zheng reached an agreement to renew the lease with the landlord yuan through oral communication, and paid the rent to yuan through wechat transfer. During the renewal period, on the afternoon of December 12, 2020, the victim Zhang took a bath with the electric water heater of the rented house. Due to the leakage of the water heater, Zhang was electrocuted and died at the age of 25. After investigation by the police station, the case was determined to be a non criminal case.

Zhang’s parents believed that the landlord yuan should ensure the safety of the house, water heater and other facilities provided by him, and have safety maintenance obligations for the circuits, electrical appliances and other facilities of the house involved. He was at fault for the victim’s electrocution and caused great mental harm to the family members of the deceased. Therefore, they took yuan to court and asked yuan to pay death compensation, funeral expenses, living expenses of dependants, transportation expenses, accommodation expenses, spiritual comfort, appraisal fees The total cost of body storage is more than 1 million yuan, and bear all litigation costs and preservation costs of the case.

Trial process

During the trial, the plaintiff submitted evidence to the court, such as the alarm receiving certificate, lease, inquiry record, accommodation order certificate, copy of household register, expert opinion on the cause of death and various expense receipts and invoices, to support his claim. The defendant yuan argued that he had no subjective fault in the accident and had not committed any infringement directly or indirectly. The original complaint had no factual and legal basis and should be rejected. However, from a humanitarian point of view, he was willing to make appropriate economic compensation to the plaintiff. After hearing the case, it was found that three days before the accident, the tenant of other rooms informed the victim that there was electric leakage in Zhang’s bathroom. After the Judicial Expertise Center of Henan forensic society identified the cause of the victim’s death, the victim Zhang met the criteria of electric shock death. After on-site inspection by the appraisal organization, there is no leakage in the socket circuit used by the toilet water heater in the house, and there is leakage in the water heater in the house. The defendant said that the water heater was installed around 2011 and 2012, and the specific installation time has been unclear. It has been about seven or eight years.

Referee result

The court held that the defendant and the victim’s girlfriend paid the rent through oral communication and wechat, and the defendant formed a de facto house rental relationship with the victim and his girlfriend. During the lease period, the defendant, as the lessor, shall ensure that the leased house and its ancillary facilities provided by him are safe and meet the agreed purpose, and bear the obligation of maintenance. At present, the victim died of electric shock due to electric leakage of the water heater in the bathroom when taking a bath in the bathroom of the leased house during the lease period. The water heater is also an old electrical appliance and in disrepair for a long time. Therefore, the defendant, as the lessor, shall bear the corresponding liability for compensation for the death of the victim. As an adult, the victim Zhang knew that there was electric leakage in the water heater in the toilet before use. He neither informed the defendant to repair it, nor did he repair it to a safe state to use it. He was at fault and should reduce the defendant’s responsibility. With regard to the proportion of liability, the court decided that the defendant and the deceased Zhang should bear 50% of the liability respectively based on the facts found out, the causes of the accident and the consequences of the damage. According to the provisions of the tort liability law, the interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues concerning the applicable law in the trial of personal injury compensation cases and the civil procedure law, the defendant yuan was ordered to compensate the plaintiff for various losses totaling more than 430000 yuan, and other litigation claims of the plaintiff were rejected.

Judge’s statement

Citizens enjoy the right to life and health, and their personal and property rights are protected by law. The focus of this case is whether the defendant is responsible for the death of the victim and the proportion of responsibility. The defendant has a de facto house leasing relationship with the victim. As the lessor, the defendant shall ensure that the leased house and its ancillary facilities provided by the defendant are safe and meet the agreed purpose, and have the obligation of maintenance. Therefore, the defendant shall bear the corresponding liability for compensation for the victim’s electric shock caused by electric leakage of water heater in the toilet of the leased house during the lease period. When the victim Zhang knew that there was electric leakage in the toilet, he neither informed the lessor of the maintenance nor repaired it to a safe state of use, that is, he was at fault. According to the tort liability law at the time of the case: if the infringed is also at fault for the occurrence of damage, the liability of the infringer can be reduced. Therefore, the court decided that the defendant and the deceased Zhang should bear 50% of the responsibility respectively based on the facts found out and the causes and consequences of the accident.