He Wenliang v. Wuhou District Labor Bureau of Chengdu City
(Case of Administrative Act of Determination of Work-related Injuries)
BASIC FACTS
Plaintiff: He Wenliang, Male, 70 years of age, Farmer, Living at Wu Long Township of Yanting County, Sichuan province
Defendant: Wuhou District Labor and Social Security Bureau of Chengdu, Sichuan
Legal Representative: Chen Changhua, Director General of the Bureau.
The Third Party: Chengdu Sitong Printed Circuit Boards Factory. Address: Cuqiao Township of Wuhou District of Chengdu City, Sichuan.
PROCEDURAL POSTURE
On October 23, 2002, Wuhou District Labor and Social Security Bureau of Chengdu City (hereinafter referred to as Wuhou District Labor Bureau) determined by the Letter of Determination on the Nature of Death and Injury of Enterprise Employees (Letter No. 23 [2002] of Wuhou District Labor Bureau) that the nature of the death and injury of He Wenliang's son, He Longzhang, was not work-related injury. He Wenliang was not satisfied with the determination, and applied to Chengdu Labor Bureau for reconsideration. Chengdu Labor Bureau affirmed the determination of Wuhou District Labor Bureau on the nature of He Longzhang's death and injury by the Letter of Administrative Reconsideration Decision (Administrative Reconsideration Decision No.12 [2002] of Chengdu Labor and Social Security Bureau) made on December 11, 2002. He Wenliang was not satisfied with the administrative reconsideration decision of Wuhou District Labor Bureau, either, and brought an administrative lawsuit to Wuhou District People's Court of Chengdu, Sichuan Province on January 9, 2003.
The plaintiff claimed that: He Longzhang was a worker in Chengdu Sitong Printed Circuit Boards Factory (hereinafter referred to as the Factory) before he died. In the afternoon of September 24, 2002, he was discovered falling on the ground and losing consciousness in the toilet near his workshop during working hours, and died after being sent to hospital and made emergency treatment without effect. The reasons for his death were severe craniocerebral injury and respiratory failure. Since the Factory did not pay the treatment fees and other relevant fees in full amount and in a timely manner, nor did it apply for determination of the nature of his death and injury, I applied to Wuhou District Labor Bureau for determination of the nature of He Longzhang's death and injury on October 8, 2002. Wuhou District Labor Bureau had no clear facts in determining that He Longzhang had no work-related injury, and evaded the facts that the toilet of the Factory was damp and had serious hidden trouble of safety. The craniocerebral injury of the deceased was obviously resulted from his falling down due to the turbid water in the toilet, and related to his work, so I requested for revoking the determination of the defendant on the nature of He Longzhang's death and injury.
The evidence provided by the plaintiff mainly included:
| | ゅ▆禗Θ常カ猌獼跋骋笆Ы端粄﹚︽現︽
掉篕璶
沮骋笆猭材兵砏﹚粄﹚骋笆丁初┮矫ネ砞琁ず祇ネ端籔礚闽妮続ノ猭岿粇
ゅ▆
砆Θ常カ猌獼跋骋笆㎝穦玂毁Ы
猭﹚朝地赣ЫЫ
材Θ常硄筿隔狾紅
Θ常カ猌獼跋骋笆㎝穦玂毁Ы(虏嘿猌獼跋骋笆Ы)200210る23らΘ猌骋ㄧ[2002]23腹穨戮端┦借粄﹚粄﹚ゅ▆ぇ纒彻端┦借ぃ琌端ゅ▆ぃ狝Θ常カ骋笆Ыビ叫狡某Θ常カ骋笆Ы200212る11らΘ骋︽狡∕[2002]12腹︽現狡某∕﹚蝴猌獼跋骋笆Ы癸纒彻端┦借粄﹚ゅ▆ごぃ狝猌獼跋骋笆Ы︽現狡某∕﹚20031る9らΘ常カ猌獼跋チ猭皘矗癬︽現禗砠
禗嘿纒彻ネ玡╰Θ常硄筿隔狾紅20029る24らと痁戳丁纒彻砆祇瞷篖ó丁碯┮ずぃㄆ竒癳┕洛皘毕礚芵福穕端㊣碻吏癐很紅よゼのì肂や獀励禣のㄤ闽禣ノゼ矗癬端┦借粄﹚и200210る8ら猌獼跋骋笆Ыビ叫癸纒彻端┦借粄﹚猌獼跋骋笆Ы粄﹚纒彻ぃ琌端┮ㄌ沮ㄆ龟ぃ睲磷紅よ碯┮奸楞Τ留眞ㄆ龟陪琌砆碯┮ず縩菲τ璓芵福穕端莱籔Τ闽叫―篗綪砆癸纒彻端┦借粄﹚
矗ㄑ璶靡沮Τ
|
1. The certificate of relationship between He Wenliang and He Longzhang, in support of the qualification of the subject who files the administrative action.
| | 1ゅ▆籔纒彻闽╰靡ノ靡矗癬︽現禗砠砰戈
|
2. Photo of the toilet of the Factory, which supports that there was turbid water in the toilet and the floor was slippery when wet, and there were unsafe factors.
| | 2Θ常硄筿隔狾紅碯┮酚ノ靡赣碯┮Τ縩楞菲ㄣΤぃ
|
3. He Longzhang's clothes soaked by the turbid water when he fell down, which supports that his falling down was due to the fact that the toilet was slippery when wet.
The defendant pleaded that: This Bureau sent personnel to carry out investigation at the Factory immediately after it accepted the plaintiff's application. Since He Longzhang went to the toilet for urination first without entering into the workshop after the clock was striking for work, and suffered an injury resulting from carelessness, and died after being sent to hospital for rescue without effect. Therefore, we determined that He Longzhang's going to toilet had nothing to do with his work, and this was not a work-related injury. The plaintiff had no evidence to support that there was unsafe hidden trouble in the toilet.
The main evidence provided by the defendant included:
| | 3纒彻篖砆縩楞︾狝ノ靡纒彻篖碯┮楞菲┮璓
砆臛嘿иЫ瞶ビ叫Θ常硄筿隔狾紅秈︽秸琩纒彻琌痁筧羘臫ゼ秈ó丁τ碯┮獽碯┮ぃ稸篖端竒癳┕洛皘穖毕礚珿粄﹚纒彻碯┮籔眖ㄆセ戮礚闽ぃ妮端嘿碯┮ぃ留眞⊿Τ靡沮靡龟
砆矗ㄑ璶靡沮Τ
|
1. Application Letter for Determination of Work-related Injuries, which supports that Chengdu Wuhou District Labor Bureau made determination on the nature of He Longzhang's injury and death on the basis of He Wenliang's application.
| | 1端粄﹚ビ叫ノ靡Θ常カ猌獼跋骋笆Ы琌沮ゅ▆ビ叫癸纒彻端┦借ぉ粄﹚
|
2. Letter of Determination on the Nature of Injuries and Death of Enterprise Employees (Letter No.23 [2002] of Chengdu Wuhou District Labor Bureau), in support of the determination conclusions and reasons of Chengdu Wuhou District Labor Bureau on the nature of He Longzhang's injury and death.
| | 2Θ猌骋ㄧ[2002]23腹穨戮端┦借粄﹚ノ靡Θ常カ猌獼跋骋笆Ы癸纒彻端┦借粄﹚挡阶㎝瞶パ
|
3. Letter of Administrative Reconsideration Decision (Administrative Reconsideration Decision No.12 [2002] of Chengdu Labor and Social Security Bureau), in support of the reconsideration conclusions and reasons of Chengdu Labor Bureau on determining the nature of Longzhang's injury and death.
| | 3Θ骋︽狡∕[2002]12腹︽現狡某∕﹚ノ靡Θ常カ骋笆Ы癸纒彻端┦借粄﹚狡某挡阶㎝瞶パ
|
4. Medical Certificate of Death of Residents, which supports the time of He Longzhang's death was on September 28, 2002, and the reasons thereof were ¨respiratory failure resulting from severe craniocerebral injury〃.
| | 4﹡チ洛厩靡ノ靡纒彻丁20029る28ら¨芵福穕端璓㊣碻吏癐很璓〃
|
5. Investigation Report on He Longzhang Accident, which supports that Chengdu Wuhou District Labor Bureau had sent personnel to the villagers' committee of Gaobei Village of Cuqiao Township and the Factory to investigate the reasons for Longzhang's injury and death and the relevant information before making determination on the nature of Longzhang's injury and death.
| | 5纒彻ㄆ珿秸琩厨ノ靡Θ常カ猌獼跋骋笆Ы癸纒彻端┦借粄﹚玡罫爵秏蔼窸〆穦㎝硄筿隔狾紅秸琩纒彻端璓のΤ闽薄猵
|
6. Testimony of witnesses Zhangce, Huang Zegang, and Luo Zhiqiang, which supports that the ground of the toilet of the Factory was not slippery on the day when the accident occurred.
The regulation bases provided by the defendant were as follows:
| | 6眎郸独緼纃в眏靡靡ēノ靡ㄆ祇讽ぱ硄筿隔狾紅碯┮礚楞菲瞷禜
砆矗ㄑ猭砏ㄌ沮Τ
|
1. Measures for Trial Implementation of Work-Related Injury Insurance of Enterprise Employees (hereinafter referred to as Trial Measures), which were promulgated by the Ministry of Labor in August, 1996.
| | 1骋笆场19968る祇ガ穨戮端玂繧刚︽快猭
|
2. Interim Provisions on Delineation of Work-related and Non Work-Related Death and Injuries (hereinafter referred to as the Interim Provisions), which were printed and distributed by the Labor Office of Sichuan Province in 1989. And
| | 2骋笆芔1989祇闽购だ籔獶端既︽砏﹚
|
3. Letter of Reply to the Determination of the Nature of Injuries and Disabilities of Employees, which was promulgated by the Labor and Social Security Office of Sichuan Province on October 9, 2002.
The third party pleaded that: There had never been any case in which anyone fell down in the toilet of our Factory, and the defendant correctly determined the nature of He Longzhang's death and injury.
In the cross-examination at court, plaintiff He Wenliang had no objections to evidence No.1 through No. 4 provided by the defendant, but believed that the contents of evidence No. 5 was not truthful, and the persons under investigation in evidence No.6 were all employees of the Factory, and had relationship of interests with the defendant. Meantime, the plaintiff believed that the defendant misunderstood the relevant laws and regulations when determining whether He Longzhang had suffered from work-related injury, because Article 8 of the Trial Measures did not prescribe that work-related injury should be death or injury occurred on a job position, and the defendant had no legal basis to consider the ¨going to toilet〃 at working hours as having nothing to do with work, and ¨going to toilet〃 was not excluded from the provisions of Article 9 of the said Trial Measures on the circumstances that were not determined as work-related injuries. The defendant believed that plaintiff's evidence No.2 could not prove that the scene of the accident was slippery when wet, and there was no obvious turbid water on the ground shown from the photos, and plaintiff's evidence No.3 could neither prove that the garment was the one worn by He Longzhang when he suffered from the mishap, nor could it support that the toilet was slippery. Meanwhile, the defendant believed that it had no error in applying the regulations and rules for determining whether He Longzhang had work-related injury, because an employee's ¨going to toilet〃 had no direct relationship with his work, and was a private matter. The third party did not contest the evidence provided by plaintiff and defendant.
| | 3骋笆㎝穦玂毁芔200210る9ら闽戮端摧┦借粄﹚拜肈狡ㄧ
材臛嘿и紅碯┮眖ゼ祇ネ筁Τ菲薄猵砆癸纒彻端┦借粄﹚琌タ絋
猭畑借靡いゅ▆癸砆矗ㄑ靡沮14礚钵某粄靡沮5ず甧ぃ痷龟靡沮6い砆秸琩А硄紅戮籔砆甡闽╰粄砆粄﹚纒彻琌妮端癸Τ闽猭砏㎝砏彻瞶秆Τ粇穨戮端玂繧刚︽快猭材兵⊿Τ砏﹚ゲ斗琌盺祇ネ端琌端砆р痁丁¨碯┮〃瞶秆籔礚闽⊿Τ猭ㄌ沮τ穨戮端玂繧刚︽快猭材兵い砏﹚ぃ粄﹚端薄⊿Τ盢¨碯┮〃逼埃砆粄靡沮2ぃ靡瞷初楞菲眖酚礚陪縩靡沮3琂ぃ靡琌纒彻祇ネ種┮︾狝ぃ靡碯┮楞菲粄粄﹚纒彻琌妮端続ノ猭砏砏彻礚粇戮¨碯┮〃籔礚钡闽╰莱妮╬ㄆ材癸砆矗ㄑ靡沮礚钵某
|
Dear visitor,you are attempting to view a subscription-based section of lawinfochina.com. If you are already a subscriber, please login to enjoy access to our databases . If you are not a subscriber, please subscribe . Should you have any questions, please contact us at:
+86 (10) 8268-9699 or +86 (10) 8266-8266 (ext. 153)
Mobile: +86 133-1157-0713
Fax: +86 (10) 8266-8268
database@chinalawinfo.com
| |
眤眤瞷璶秈琌猭璣ゅ呼穦盡跋眤琌и璣ゅノめ钡 祅魁秈穦盡跋琩高眤┮惠璶獺眤临ぃ琌и 璣ゅノめ叫猔ユ莱禣ノΘи璣ゅ穦 Τ拜肈叫ㄓ筿玹高
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail: database@chinalawinfo.com
|
| | | |
| | | |