Research On The Security Obligations Of Property Service Enterprises Under The Third Party Infringement

With the continuous advancement of urbanization,the property service industry is booming.The emergence of a new type of social subject will inevitably be accompanied by the accumulation of social wealth and the increase of risks,which will further impose corresponding regulatory requirements on the law.Regrettably,although Article 1254 of the newly revised "Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China" clearly stipulates that the property service enterprise shall be responsible for certain security obligations under the circumstances of throwing(dropping)objects at height,but Article 1198,paragraph 1 It has not been explicitly listed as the subject of security guarantee obligations.In judicial practice,whether property service companies can be classified as managers of "public places" as stipulated in Article 1198 needs to be analyzed in conjunction with judicial practice.Article942 of the "Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China" simply refers to the situation in which the parties in the legal relationship of property services determine the content of the security guarantee obligations in the form of contracts.However,in the case of the involvement of the third party’s infringement behavior studied in this article,the law does not clearly stipulate what responsibilities the property service company should bear when the security obligation is not fulfilled.This not only caused a deadlock in theoretical research,but also caused judicial Confusion in the results of dispute resolution in practice.The "Property Management Regulations" issued by the State Council is the main normative document for resolving property disputes,but it only outlines the relevant obligations of property service companies,which is principled and abstract.Therefore,the regulations are not very practicable for judges to hear such disputes.Furthermore,due to the different value judgments of judges,different laws are used to judge cases,leading to different trial results in similar cases and the same case.In summary,this article intends to conduct a systematic study on the security obligations of property service companies under third-party infringement.This article mainly introduces typical cases of related interest disputes between property service companies and owners who have not fulfilled the obligation of safety protection by a third party who infringes on the rights of the owner in judicial practice,and puts forward the issue that this article focuses on,namely,the infringement of the third party If the behavior causes damage to the owner ’ s rights,does the property service company have an obligation to prevent or exempt the owner from the infringement of the third party? If the property service company has the obligation to prevent a third party from infringing on the owner’s rights,the nature of the obligation How to determine the reasonable limits of the content of the property service company’s safety protection obligations and the content of the obligations are unclear,which makes the courts try such cases in judicial practice,and the scope of the property service companies’ safety protection obligations to community owners continues to expand,resulting in Residential property service companies have too much responsibility for safety protection.At the same time,due to the general legislation on the supplementary responsibility of the security obligor,the courts have misunderstood the supplementary responsibility in judicial practice.Therefore,this article first affirms that the community property service company undertakes the safety guarantee obligations stipulated in Article1198,and clarifies that the safety guarantee obligations are both legal and contractual.Secondly,this article clarifies the content of security protection obligations of community property service enterprises in advance prevention,interim stop and after-event relief based on the theoretical circle’s content of security protection obligations and the limiting factors that should be considered in determining the content of the obligations.Finally,with regard to the supplementary responsibilities of property service companies involved in court trials of such disputes in judicial practice when they violate their safety guarantee obligations,the author believes that the supplementary responsibilities borne by security guarantee obligors in future legislation can be from the following three In terms of detailed regulations,that is,the fault situation of the third party and the security obligor,the order of the security obligor’s responsibility to the victim in the supplementary liability,and the scope of the supplement are clarified.To sum up,this article will try to analyze the above problems in judicial practice,hoping to contribute to the refinement of security obligations in the judicial interpretation of the Civil Code in the future.