| Two plaintiffs——Wu Yunsheng and Kang Xiangliang, were wounded when doing mining work in Tan Jia Antimony Mine on February28,1988. They institute legal proceedings to Lengshuijiang People’s Court for labor dispute(industrial injury compensation) on February7,2007,asking the respondent to pay for about RMB50thousand yuan as arrears of wagesã€injury compensation and mental damage compensation. Lengshuijiang People’s Court made a civil award of rejecting the two plaintiffs’compensation litigation request on January10,2008. After the judgment came into effects, Wu Yunsheng and Kang Xiangliang filed a complaint to the procuratorial organs for their dissatisfaction with the judgment. Loudi Intermediate Peoples’s Court decided to question this case, and made a judgment of reversal remandment. During the review,Lengshuijiang Peoples’Court divided the case into two parts, one as labor contract dispute and the other is employees compensation,which is a special category of personal injury. Review verdicted that the respondent pay Wu Yunsheng93225yuan for disability compensationã€nurse feeã€appraisal fee and be-bring-up person’s living expenses; pay Kang Xiangliang23308yuan for disability compensation and appraisal fee. There is a huge difference between the first and second judgment——plaintiffs got nothing from the first judgment, but got about100thousand yuan from the second judgment after they changed their cause of action and claims.This article Started with case analysis, compared the difference between the employees’ compensation and the personal injury compensation from the aspects of employees’ compensation, personal injury compensation, limitation of action, and competing situation. It analysed different modes of current theoretical treatment of concurrence. Meanwhile to the different treatments of concurrence in current judicial practice, this article proposed some processing suggestions in order to offer useful help to the legislation of such cases and legal practice. |
