The Shanghai court ruled that parents jointly compensate the injured 250000 yuan. A 3-year-old child drove a toy car and collided with a passerby, resulting in a comminuted fracture. Zhang | Zhang | comminuted
A three-year-old child driving a toy car downstairs accidentally smashed a pedestrian into a comminuted fracture? Recently, the People's Court of Fengxian District, Shanghai, concluded a case of minors infringing on their right to health and ruled that minors and their guardians jointly compensated the injured with more than 250000 yuan in losses.
One day last year, a three-year-old child named Zhang accidentally knocked down a pedestrian named Lin while driving a toy car on a square in a residential area in Fengxian, causing Lin to be injured. After the incident, Lin was sent to the hospital for treatment and was diagnosed with a comminuted fracture of the right femoral neck, requiring hospitalization and surgical treatment. After appraisal, Lin's injury constitutes a level ten disability. Due to the inability to reach a consensus with Zhang's parents regarding compensation matters, Lin sued Zhang, his parents Zhang, and Jiang as defendants in Fengxian Court.
The defendant argued that there was no objection to the amount spent on the plaintiff's treatment, appraisal, and disability level. However, at the time of the incident, Zhang was only 3 years old and the toy car he was driving was damaged, so it was impossible for him to be hit and injured by the plaintiff himself. Therefore, Zhang did not engage in any infringement behavior, and Zhang and his parents should not bear any liability for infringement.
After trial, the Fengxian Court found that on the day of the incident, when Zhang was driving a toy car, his father Zhang was also on the side. After the incident, Zhang immediately reported to the police, and the on-site public security mediation agreement issued by the police station clearly stated that Zhang admitted to the fact that Zhang had hit the plaintiff while driving a toy car, causing him to fall and be injured. Both parties also confirmed the compensation matter and further negotiated after the plaintiff sought medical treatment. The agreement was signed by Zhang and Jiang. The defendant argued that Zhang did not commit any infringement, but failed to provide corresponding evidence, and the content of the defense was inconsistent with the content recorded in the on-site public security mediation agreement issued by the public security organs on that day. Therefore, the court did not accept the defendant's defense opinion.
At the time of the incident, Zhang was a three-year-old child, and his parents Zhang and Jiang, as guardians of Zhang, failed to fulfill their guardianship duties. Especially when Zhang was also present at the scene, they failed to provide proper guidance, timely detect and stop Zhang's dangerous behavior, resulting in Zhang hitting the plaintiff while driving a toy car and injuring him. Therefore, they should bear compensation responsibility for the plaintiff's losses. Based on this, the Shanghai Fengxian Court ultimately ruled that Zhang, Zhang, and Jiang jointly compensated Lin for various losses of more than 250000 yuan. If Zhang had property, he would pay compensation fees from his own property, and the shortfall would be compensated by his guardians Zhang and Jiang.
After the judgment, neither the plaintiff nor the defendant appealed, and the first instance judgment has now taken effect.
