Is it a natural disaster or a man-made disaster?

On July 20, 2021, Jiaozuo City experienced a rare heavy rain in history, and many people's property suffered varying degrees of loss. But for these losses, is it force majeure caused by natural disasters? Or some other human factor? In this case, according to the evidence and defense of the parties in this case, combined with the terrain of the involved scene, the court ruled that the loss caused by the flooding of the house during the rainstorm of the plaintiff in this case had nothing to do with the defendant, and rejected the plaintiff's lawsuit request. Next, let's follow Jin research lawyer Tang Meili to understand the specific situation of the case!

Basic case

After the heavy rainstorm on July 20, 2021, the wall of the self-built house of plaintiff Wang Mou was collapsed by rain, and the rain flooded into the house, causing the items stored in the house to become moldy and unusable. The plaintiff believes that the reason why the house was flooded is because a development company behind the house involved in the case accumulated the construction of earth in the drainage ditch behind their houses, so it requires the development company and others to jointly compensate their property losses of more than 5 million yuan.

Jin Yan lawyer Tang Meili, as the agent of a development company of the defendant, expressed an opinion that the plaintiff's loss was a natural disaster, a force majeure caused by a sudden rainstorm, which could not be foreseen and could not be avoided. First of all, the defendant did not infringe. The plaintiff's house is obviously lower than the construction site of the development company, and the defendant's earthwork is 30 meters away from the plaintiff's house, which is a legal pile of soil. The gully behind the house involved in the case was a dry gully, not a drainage ditch, which was originally not unobvious. Trees and weeds grew in the gully, and the defendant never stacked earth in the dry gully. There was no causal relationship between the flooding of the plaintiff's house and the defendant's behavior. Secondly, the plaintiff's claim for compensation for its loss of more than 5 million yuan has no evidence to prove.

In the trial, the plaintiff submitted photos of the house after it was soaked in water, the status of the dry ditch after the house, and other photos, as well as the items stored in his house and the sales contract he had signed with others to prove his lawsuit request. We have submitted the aerial pictures taken before the construction of the project involved in the case, the notice posted by the village committee when the rainstorm occurred informing the villagers that the villagers should promptly transfer people and valuables when the rainstorm hit, as well as the industrial and commercial registration information of the company registered by the plaintiff and other evidence to prove that there is no factual infringement and that the plaintiff's loss has no causal relationship with us. And the amount of the plaintiff's loss is not based on calculation.

The court said that the plaintiff had not submitted any valid evidence to prove the specific situation behind the house before the development company stacked the earth. After on-site examination, the construction site of the development company is located in the north of the plaintiff's house, with a higher terrain, while the plaintiff's house is located in a lower terrain. Considering the huge rainfall in Jiaozuo area around July 20, 2021, a large amount of rain concentrated in this area in a short time, which is prone to flood irrigation. On this basis, the court held that the plaintiff claimed that a development company piled earth behind the house in question, resulting in poor drainage, which caused the accident in this case, but it did not submit any effective evidence to prove its claim, according to the principle of "who claims, who provides evidence", the plaintiff should bear adverse legal consequences for this. To say the least, even if there is a connection between the development company's stacking of earth and the plaintiff's house being washed in by rain, the plaintiff still needs to prove the exact amount of its loss. However, the plaintiff did not submit any effective evidence to prove the specific amount of its losses, and the plaintiff made it clear during the trial that it would not apply for property damage appraisal. Therefore, the court confirms that the plaintiff's claim that the accident in this case caused losses of more than 5 million yuan is insufficient, the court does not support, and rejects the plaintiff's lawsuit request.

Case analysis

As a tort dispute case, according to the principle of "who claims, who provides evidence", the plaintiff should provide evidence to prove that there is a causal relationship between his loss and the defendant, as well as the calculation basis of the loss. The defendant should prove that he did not infringe, and there is no causal relationship between the plaintiff's loss and the defendant. If there is a causal relationship, is the basis for calculating the plaintiff's loss reasonable? How much should the defendant bear? Is the plaintiff at fault for his loss? If the parties do not have effective evidence to prove the above issues, they should bear the adverse legal consequences of failure to prove.

Law link

Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China

Article 67 The parties have the responsibility to provide evidence for their claims. The people's court shall investigate and collect evidence that the parties and their agents AD litem cannot collect on their own due to objective reasons, or evidence that the people's court considers necessary for the trial of a case. The people's court shall, in accordance with legal procedures, examine and verify the evidence comprehensively and objectively.

Article 147 If a defendant, having been summoned by summons, refuses to appear in court without justifiable reasons, or withdraws from the court without permission of the court, a judgment may be made by default.

Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China

Article 90 A party shall provide evidence to prove the facts on which his claim for action is based or the facts on which the other party's claim for action is based in rebuttal, except as otherwise provided by law. Before making a judgment, if the parties fail to provide evidence or the evidence is insufficient to prove their factual claims, the party bearing the burden of proof shall bear the adverse consequences.

Lawyer's introduction

Lawyer Tang Meili, a member of the Communist Party of China, is a practicing lawyer of Jinyan Law Firm. She graduated from Northern University for Nationalities and obtained her practicing license in 2015.

Good at private lending disputes, housing sales contract disputes, construction contract disputes and other commercial economic cases, real estate, corporate affairs.

Contact information:

Tel: 18039133311

Email: 1075433424@qq.com