Have a good weekend to meet friends for a basketball game

But the tooth was knocked away~

I signed up for a badminton competition

Injured by an opponent’s ball

What will you do

Basic 01 Case

Song and Zhou, both amateur badminton players, have participated in badminton competitions since 2015. On the morning of April 28, 2020, Song Mouzhen, Zhou Mou and four people outside the case played a 3 on 3 badminton match in the open-air field of Red Scarf Park, Chaoyang District, Beijing. During the game, Song Mouzhen stood at the service line and received the ball in front of the opponent’s net, then picked the ball back to Zhou’s midfield. Zhou quickly killed the ball and attacked. Song Mouzhen held his racket upright and failed to defend. He was hit in the right eye by a badminton. After the incident, Song Wenzhen went to the People’s Hospital of Peking University for treatment. More than 5 weeks after the operation, optometry showed that the best corrected visual acuity of his right eye was 0.05. Song Mouzhen appealed to the court and demanded Zhou Mou to compensate for medical expenses, nursing expenses, hospital board allowance, nutrition expenses and other expenses.

Judgment

The effective referee believes that competitive sports are different from the general life field, and the main purpose is to win. This kind of sports has the characteristics of confrontation and personal danger. The participants are in potential danger, which is not only the potential maker of danger, but also the potential bearer of danger. Badminton is a typical antagonistic sports competition. In addition to the conventional risks such as sprain and strain, the more prominent risks are that the badminton itself is small, dense and fast. If the player does not make a timely judgment, he will be hit or even injured. As a badminton enthusiast who has participated in badminton for many years, Song Mouzhen should have some knowledge and foresight about his ability and other competitors, as well as the danger and possible damage caused by this sport. However, Song Mouzhen still volunteered to participate in the competition and put himself in potential danger, which belongs to a voluntary risk taking behavior.

Never

According to the first paragraph of Article 1176 of the Civil Code, in this case, only when Zhou intentionally or grossly negligently caused the injury to Song, he should bear the liability for tort damages. In this case, Zhou’s killing attack was a normal technical action of this kind of sport. Zhou did not obviously violate the rules of the game, and should not be deemed to have gross negligence. In addition, the current law does not provide for fair liability in the circumstances involved in this case. Therefore, Song has no right to claim that Zhou should bear the liability for compensation or share the loss. On January 4, 2021, the court of first instance decided to reject all the claims of Song Mouzhen. The court of second instance ruled to reject the appeal and uphold the original judgment.

Typical significance

This case is the first case to apply the provisions of Article 1176 of the Civil Code “willing to take risks” to make a judgment after the implementation of the Civil Code.

Before the implementation of the Civil Code, due to unclear legal provisions, people’s courts are prone to have differences of understanding when dealing with civil disputes caused by physical injuries in recreational and sports activities, thus causing disputes. The establishment of the rule of “willing to take risks” in the Civil Code not only unifies the ideological understanding, but also unifies the judgment criteria.

The trial court of this case applied the rule of “willing to take risks” in combination with the specific circumstances of the case, clearly ruled that the participants in cultural and sports activities who had no intention or gross negligence should not be held liable for damages, made clear the judicial attitude of refusing to “make peace”, and announced the rule that adventurers should be responsible for their own acts, which not only promoted the socialist core values, but also promoted the healthy and orderly development of cultural and sports activities, It also provides useful judicial experience for the implementation of the new rules of the Civil Code.

The above content is from the official account “the Supreme People’s Court