"Chongmen" was stuck on the subway and the passenger twisted his waist, who is responsible?
Zhang Jianbo
The notification sounded that the subway door was closed, but Li (surnamed Hua) rushed into the carriage at a brisk pace. Unexpectedly, the trailer he was carrying was caught by the door. During the process of pulling the trailer, Li suffered a waist injury.
For this reason, Li sued the subway company to Liangxi Court of Wuxi City.
The judge in charge of the case was interviewed by reporters on February 1.
Yangtze Evening News/Ziniu News reporter Zhang Jianbo
Injured Passengers Sued the Subway for Compensation
In June 2021, Li, a citizen of Wuxi, pulled a trailer for grocery shopping to take the subway as usual.
When arriving at the platform, the warning light in the subway car has already flashed and the warning sound has sounded, and the warning light in the car is also on.
In order not to miss the subway, Li hurriedly pulled the trailer and ran into the carriage.
The moment Li stepped into the compartment, the compartment door began to close, but his trailer did not fully enter the compartment. As a result, the two attempts to close the door were blocked by the trailer, and the door was quickly bounced open when the door was about to close.
During this process, Li suffered a waist injury due to pulling the trailer hard, and was diagnosed with a lumbar fracture, spending more than 28,000 yuan in medical expenses.
After judicial appraisal, Li's injury constituted a ninth-grade disability.
Li believes that the subway company, as a manager, failed to fulfill its safety guarantee obligations and caused damage to others, so it should be liable for compensation, so Li filed a lawsuit in the court.
The subway has fulfilled its "obligation" and the court rejected the appeal
The court found that Li took the risk of quickly towing the trailer into the compartment when the beep sounded and the warning light was flashing. The interval between the moment he entered the compartment and the closing of the door was within 1 to 2 seconds. The compartment was pinched by the compartment door and was injured by force.
A safety sign saying "door lights are flashing, please do not get on the train" was posted on the conspicuous place of the platform door where the incident occurred. When flashing, it is forbidden to get on and off the bus." The above-mentioned rules were posted in 13 places at the station where the accident happened.
The court held that the subway company, as a subway operation and service enterprise, gave safety reminders to passengers by posting safety signs and the "Guidelines for Rail Transit Passengers" and other methods, and also set up a reasonable process for closing the doors of the carriages, that is, a reminder will sound before closing the door At the same time, the warning lights are flashing, so the subway company has taken predictable and preventable protective measures.
At the same time, as a person with full capacity for civil conduct, Li ignored the safety warnings and neglected his duty of care for his own safety, and he should be responsible for the damage caused by this.
In the end, the court ruled to dismiss Li's claim.
Li appealed, and the original judgment was upheld in the second instance.
There is a prerequisite for public places to fulfill their security obligations
Li Qilin, the judge handling the case, said in an interview that Article 1198 of the Civil Code stipulates that: operators and managers of public places such as stations, airports, stadiums, and public places, or organizers of mass activities, Those who fail to fulfill their security obligations and cause damage to others shall bear tort liability.
However, it should be noted that the above-mentioned legal provisions cannot be interpreted one-sidedly as "as long as the accident occurs in a public place or business place, the operator or manager must bear the responsibility", because the premise for the operator or manager to assume responsibility is that "there is no Fulfilling security obligations."
Looking at the case, the subway company was not at fault in its safety guarantee obligations and does not need to bear the responsibility.
The judge reminded that, on the one hand, the majority of passengers should develop good travel habits. "Rushing and grabbing the door" not only does not save time, but may also cause accidents, and the gain outweighs the gain; safety of passengers.