The court dismissed the first instance case, the mother drowned while rescuing the child! The family sued multiple parties for 1.29 million yuan, 6-year-old boy fell into the water
A year ago, Chongqing tourist Ms. Li and her family of four went to the Dadu River in Leshan, Sichuan for a trip. Her 6-year-old son Xiaoyu fell into the river, and Ms. Li also fell into the river to save her son. Later, Xiaoyu was rescued by swimming enthusiasts, but Ms. Li unfortunately drowned.
After the incident, Ms. Li's family believed that the cause of the accident was that the venue had no warning signs or safety guards, and there was no safety officer. In addition, there were a large number of concrete cones hidden in the river bank, which caused the person who fell into the water to lose his ability to move after being hit. The Leshan Winter Swimming Association and the relevant street offices and communities are the users and managers of the winter swimming square where the incident occurred. The family sued the court and demanded that all parties jointly compensate more than 1.29 million yuan.
Recently, the People's Court of Shizhong District, Leshan City, made a first-instance judgment, holding that the Winter Swimming Plaza was the common name for the place by local residents, and the place where the accident occurred was part of the natural river channel. The defendant Leshan Winter Swimming Association and relevant street offices and communities should not bear compensation liability for Li's death, and the plaintiff's lawsuit was rejected.
Back to August 20, 2023, at about 13:00 on that day, Chongqing tourist Ms. Li and her husband Mr. Sun brought their two sons, Xiaoyu and Xiaochen, to the Xiaogongzui Winter Swimming Square on the opposite bank of the Leshan Giant Buddha. They went down the river estuary stairs to the Dadu River to play. During this time, Mr. Sun had to call and leave, leaving Ms. Li alone with her two sons playing by the river.
Unexpectedly, her 6-year-old son Xiaoyu accidentally fell into the river. In a hurry, Ms. Li squatted down to pull her son, but fell into the river together. According to public media reports, at that time, an eyewitness saw this and hurriedly shouted "Help, someone fell into the water", but "the mother disappeared in two seconds after entering the water." At that time, there happened to be a swimming enthusiast in the waters nearby, and Xiaoyu was eventually rescued to shore.
At this time, Mr. Sun, who had just finished a phone call, heard someone shouting "Help" and hurried to the riverside. He found that his eldest son Xiaoyu had been rescued from the river by swimming enthusiasts, but his wife Ms. Li was nowhere to be seen. Five days later, Ms. Li's body was found at the gate of the navigation and power hub 40 to 50 kilometers downstream of the Minjiang River.
Claiming RMB 1.29 million from the Winter Swimming Association, the Street Office and the community
After the incident, Ms. Li's parents, husband and son jointly filed a civil lawsuit for tort liability disputes, naming Leshan Winter Swimming Association, Haitang Street Office of Shizhong District, Leshan City, Jiaochangba Street Community and Dafo Street Office as defendants, demanding compensation for dependents' living expenses, death compensation, funeral expenses, compensation for mental damage, etc., totaling more than 1.29 million yuan.
The family members believe that Xiaogongzui Winter Swimming Square is a 100-meter-long unenclosed area that the local government of Leshan City agreed to retain, and a 100-square-meter area was allocated for the management and use of the defendant Leshan Winter Swimming Association. Haitang Sub-district Office is responsible for the management and maintenance of the river involved in the case. Jiaochangba Street Community is the specific maintenance unit.
The family members believed that the cause of the accident was that there were no warning signs and safety guards at the site, and there was no safety officer. In addition, there were a large number of concrete cones hidden in the river bank, which caused the people who fell into the water to lose their ability to move after being hit, resulting in many people falling into the water and dying at the same location during the summer vacation. As the specific area responsible for the tourist city of Leshan, the defendant failed to implement matters such as protecting the personal safety of tourists, which damaged its image as a tourist city.
During the trial, the plaintiff stated in court that the Winter Swimming Plaza is a public place and the Leshan Winter Swimming Association is the actual manager and user of the venue. The Haitang Subdistrict Office, Jiaochangba Street Community, and Dafo Subdistrict Office are also managers of the venue. The Leshan Winter Swimming Association failed to fulfill its safety reminder obligations, nor did it set up safety measures or eliminate safety risks, which led to the accident in this case, so it should bear all compensation liability. The Haitang Subdistrict Office, Jiaochangba Street Community, and Dafo Subdistrict Office failed to fulfill their management obligations and should bear compensation liability together with the Leshan Winter Swimming Association.
In response, the Leshan Winter Swimming Association argued that there is no document or information proving that the government has assigned the association to manage the Winter Swimming Square. The Winter Swimming Square was renovated over more than ten years by many winter swimming enthusiasts who contributed their efforts and money. The association not only has no management rights, but also cannot decide on its own the right to use the square. The association does not charge any fees at the Winter Swimming Square, nor does it provide tourist attraction services. All its actions are spontaneous actions by natural persons, and they should bear the responsibility for what happens.
The Haitang Sub-district Office and Jiaochangba Street Community argued that the accident occurred within the river channel and that they were not the management units of the river involved and had fulfilled their warning and patrol duties at the river mouth; the deceased was a person with full civil capacity and the cause of his death was his own negligence.
The Dafo Subdistrict Office argued that although the river in question is located within its jurisdiction, it is a natural river, not an artificially excavated river. Although the Winter Swimming Plaza is a reinforcement of the river bank in question, it cannot change the nature of its natural river. For natural rivers, current laws and regulations do not require the establishment of safety protection measures and safety warning signs and other safety measures.
At the same time, the Dafo Sub-district Office believes that adults should be the first responsible persons for their own safety and should not rely on constant reminders from relevant state agencies for their safety. This case should not be guided by emotion or result responsibility, and the losses should not be borne by the defendant who did not constitute an infringement. Therefore, it requests that all the plaintiff's claims be dismissed.
After on-site inspection, the accident site is commonly known as the Winter Swimming Square. The only entrance to the site is the staircase at the Xiaogongzui River Mouth, which is directly connected to the Dadu River. A safety warning sign is set up at the staircase: "For the safety of you and your family, cherish your life and be careful when entering the river." A protective fence chain is set up beside the exposed river during the inspection.
After hearing the case, the People's Court of Shizhong District, Leshan City, determined that the place where the incident occurred was part of a natural river, and was not a place that provided services to the public or conducted commercial operations for the public. As for the management of natural rivers, the current laws and regulations do not require the installation of safety protection facilities and safety warning signs and other safety measures. Although the Dafo Sub-district Office is the manager of the river section involved in the case, it was not at fault for the consequences of Li's death and does not need to bear civil tort liability.
The court held that the plaintiff's mere provision of photos and statements was insufficient to prove that the Leshan Winter Swimming Association, as a social group legal person, was the actual manager and user of the area. Secondly, combined with the above findings, the place where the accident occurred in this case was part of a natural river channel and was not a place that provided services to the public or conducted commercial operations targeting the public. The Leshan Winter Swimming Association should not be held liable for compensation for Li's death.
Combined with the above findings, Haitang Subdistrict Office and Jiaochangba Street Community are not the managers of the river section involved in the case, and they have set up safety warning signs at the lower river mouth all year round, so they should not bear compensation liability for Li's death. Recently, the Shizhong District Court of Leshan City made a first-instance judgment, dismissing the plaintiff's lawsuit.
On the afternoon of June 19, a relevant person in charge of the Leshan Winter Swimming Association said that they had never thought that the swimming enthusiasts saved people and the Winter Swimming Association would become the defendant; the place where the incident occurred was a natural river channel, and they should take responsibility for what happened; they expressed satisfaction with the verdict.
It is understood that since 2006, members of the Leshan Winter Swimming Association have rescued more than 200 people who fell into the waters of the Dadu River, Qingyi River and Minjiang River in Leshan. The above-mentioned person in charge said that although the association became a defendant this time, everyone will not hesitate to save people when encountering danger in the future.
As of the afternoon of June 19, Red Star News reporters have not been able to contact the plaintiff. At present, the court's first-instance judgment has not yet taken effect. If the plaintiff is dissatisfied with the judgment, he or she may appeal within 15 days from the date of delivery of the judgment.
