The Paper Journalist Zhang Liutao

  Someone died of drunkenness during the dinner. Under what circumstances should the co-drinkers be exempt from responsibility, and under what circumstances, even if they are at different tables, they should be held responsible?

  On August 27, The Paper (www.thepaper.cn) learned from the Intermediate People’s Court of Shaoxing City, Zhejiang Province that a few days ago, the court disclosed two cases of civil disputes caused by drunken deaths, and showed the public the presence of co-drinkers. Different ways of handling the parties after being drunk have resulted in different legal liabilities.

Case 1: fulfill the duty of care and exempt from liability

  Dayong and his friend Azhuo and his wife met for a dinner at home. Dayong, who has always been outspoken, grew drunk after drinking a lot of wine that night. After the dinner, Azhuo and his wife were worried that it would be unsafe for Dayong to go home alone after drinking, so they sent Dayong home with a tricycle.

  During the period, Dayong was drunk and tried to rush out of the house and fell on his back. In order to ensure Dayong’s safety, the Azhuo and his wife asked their neighbors to help Dayong to the bed. They checked that Dayong had no obvious injuries and no abnormalities. Go home at ease.

  Unexpectedly, the next morning, Dayong was found to have weak vital signs, and died after being sent to the hospital for treatment. The cause of death was a severe brain injury.

  Afterwards, Dayong’s younger brother believed that Azhuo and his wife were directly responsible for Dayong’s death, so they took the two to the court and demanded that Dayong’s death be paid for medical expenses, death compensation and other economic losses totaling 149,736 yuan.

  During the trial, the Azhuo couple insisted that they were not responsible, but expressed their willingness to make appropriate economic compensation to the deceased based on humanitarianism.

  The court of first instance held that the Azhuo and his wife did not indulge in Dayong after drinking, and fulfilled their duty of care. There is no legal causality between Dayong's death. Therefore, it is judged that the Azhuo and his wife need not bear the responsibility. However, based on the voluntary financial compensation given by the Azhuo and his wife, they decided to compensate 20,000 yuan for the two.

  The Shaoxing Intermediate Court rejected the appeal in the second instance and upheld the original verdict.

Case 2: Failure to fulfill obligations, but also responsibilities at different tables in the same game

  In another case, 27 people who were at the same table but at different tables were found by the court to bear legal responsibility.

  On the evening of February 20, 2018, Zhang Mougen drove to a farm to participate in the annual meeting of junior high school classmates. Due to the lively atmosphere, Zhang Mougen drank more liquor. At about 20 o'clock that day, Zhang Mougen drove home alone. At about 21:14, Zhang Mougen was involved in a car accident on the road and died on the same day after the rescue failed.

  After investigation by the traffic police department of public security, Zhang Mougen was driving while drunk and was fully responsible for the accident.

  After the incident, Zhang’s family sued Shen and other 27 people who participated in the classmate’s reunion dinner on the day of the incident. They believed that the co-organizers and participants of the party did not fulfill the co-drinkers’ reasonable duty of safety and care and corresponding care and protection. Such specific obligations shall be liable for compensation for Zhang’s death.

  However, Zhang’s junior high school classmate argued: “During the meal, he did not persuade him to drink. During the meal, Zhang drank liquor alone. Before the banquet, everyone reminded each other that they could not drink while driving. Afterwards, everyone also gave humanity care money. This liability for compensation. We don’t bear it!"

  The court held that the gathering of friends and relatives to eat and drink is a kind of affectionate behavior, and each drinker has the highest duty of care for his own life safety. At the same time, all drinkers and dinner parties should be kindly reminded of other drinkers. The duty of caution, care, and assistance is safe and careful, and the duty of those at the same table should be higher than that of other co-diners. In this case, a total of 28 people including Zhang and Shen had a dinner, six of them were at the same table with Zhang. When Zhang had reached a severely drunk level, the diners allowed him to leave alone, and the accident happened due to reason. There is a certain fault.

  Comprehensively consider the cause of Zhang's death and the degree of fault of the co-diners. In the end, the court judged that the defendant Shen and other six dinner parties should each be liable for 5250 yuan in compensation, and the remaining 21 dinner parties should each be liable for 3150 yuan.

  Regarding the relevant case, the judge of the Shaoxing Intermediate Court stated that when the drinker is in danger of being drunk, other co- drinkers have a certain duty of care. This obligation is not only a moral obligation, but also a legal obligation. The "duty of care" in the case of drunken death caused by joint drinking mainly has two stages:

Drinking together: The organizer of the banquet is obligated to remind the people present to drink moderately. Other drinkers cannot forcefully persuade or punish alcohol. They should also pay special attention to observe whether anyone is drunk or otherwise unwell.

After co-drinking : The co-drinker is obliged to rescue excessive drinkers, such as discouraging drunk driving, contacting family members, medical treatment, safe escort, etc., if the co-drinker has persuaded, forced, promised and other improper behaviors while drinking , Will bear more stringent rescue obligations. If the drinker is drunk for his own reasons, the co-drinker will only be liable if he has gross negligence.

  In the trial, the court generally does not judge the co-drinker who has fulfilled the duty of care to be liable for compensation; if it is found that the co-drinker has some negligence and has not fulfilled the duty of care, it will also decide to take responsibility as appropriate.