Research On The Safety And Security Obligations Of Property Service Enterprises In High-altitude Projectile Infringement Cases

With the development of the times,the number of tall buildings increase unceasingly,and high-altitude parabolic disputes have appeared frequently,and high-altitude parabolic disputes have appeared frequently,so the Civil Code stipulates the "high-altitude projectile" clause in Article 1254,and clearly stipulates the safety and security obligations of property service enterprises in this regard and the tort liability for violation of this obligation.However,due to the rough provisions of this clause,the content of the security measures of property service enterprises and the nature and scope of their responsibilities are not clarified,resulting in different judgment standards in practice,resulting in the phenomenon of different judgments.In this context,the study of the safety and security obligations of property service enterprises in high-altitude parabolic cases is extremely important.The text of this article is divided into five parts.The first part briefly summarizes the security obligations of property service enterprises in high-altitude parabolic cases,and analyzes the related notions and theory basis.First,the notion of high-altitude projectiles is defined and distinguished from high-altitude falling objects and high-altitude falling objects.Secondly,the nature of the security obligation of the property service enterprise should be recognized as a legal obligation in principle,and the contractual obligation can be regarded as a supplement to its nature.Statutory obligations are the bottom line of property service enterprises’ security obligations,and contractual obligations can respect the autonomy of the parties and make flexible agreements on security duty,so as to balance legal provisions and freedom of contract.Finally,as for the theoretical origin of the security obligation of property service companies,it is believed that the main theory are risk-return theory,risk control theory and damage sharing theory.The second part sorts out the Current legislation and the current situation of judicature of the security obligation of property service enterprises in high-altitude parabolic cases.In terms of the current legislative situation,China’s provisions on the safety and security obligations of property service enterprises in high-altitude parabolic cases are relatively rough,and the Civil Code and Property Management Regulations do not further refine the security obligations of property service enterprises in high-altitude parabolic cases.Although some local regulations refine the safety and security obligations of property service enterprises,they are not limited to high-altitude parabolic cases,which makes it difficult to define whether property service enterprises violate safety and security duties in high-altitude parabolic cases.On the basis of the current judicial situation,through the search of cases and data analysis,it is found that the range of the security duty of property service enterprises is not clear,the identification standards for violation of safety guarantee obligations are inconsistent,and there are differences in the liability of property service enterprises for breach of security obligations in high-altitude parabolic cases.Each of these three issues is discussed in the following sections.The third part discusses the range of the safety and security duties of property service enterprises in high-altitude projectile cases.It is believed that the notion of the safety obligation of property service enterprises should be limited to a reasonable scope based on relevant theories.Specifically,the specific content of the safety and security obligations undertaken by property service enterprises in high-altitude parabolic cases should first be clarified,mainly including daily prevention obligations,timely stopping obligations and emergency rescue obligations.Regarding daily prevention obligations,a corresponding security system should be formulated and corresponding security facilities should be set up;Regarding the obligation to stop in a timely manner,a comprehensive judgment should be made based on the location where the high-altitude projectile occurred,as well as the possibility of the property staff causing the high-altitude projectile behavior,and the performance of the comprehensive property service enterprise’s stopping behavior.With regard to the obligation to provide emergency rescue,rescue should be given in a timely manner according to the severity of the injury,and if the injury is serious,it should be sent to the hospital as soon as possible.Secondly,the object of the property safety guarantee obligation in the case of high-altitude projectiles should be clarified,and the applicable object of the safety guarantee obligation should be extended to the permitted third party.Whether unauthorized persons are the subject of security obligations is not a generalization,and it is necessary to determine whether the community is a public place and can enter and exit at will.The fourth part discusses the identification standards for property service enterprises to breach their safety and security obligations in high-altitude projectile cases.It is proposed that the standard of reasonable limit should be used to determine whether the property service enterprise has violated its security obligations.Specifically,in terms of daily prevention obligations,property service enterprises can consider the number and coverage of electronic probes installed according to different needs of reality,the number of occurrences of highaltitude projectiles,the comprehensive cost of corresponding machinery and equipment,and other dimensions.In terms of the obligation to stop in a timely manner,it is necessary to relax the performance standards of the obligation,and cannot be consequential,that is,whether the property service enterprise has fulfilled its security obligation cannot be judged by the result alone,and should be comprehensively considered from a professional perspective in light of the actual situation.In terms of emergency rescue obligations,excessive requirements should not be set on property service enterprises,and after the damage result,as long as the specific emergency rescue acts implemented by the property comply with the general rescue measures under the circumstances,even if the damage is not completely eliminated,it can also be deemed to have fulfilled the emergency rescue obligation.The fifth part expound the duty of tenement for breach of security duties.In the case of a flying projectile,the duty of tenements for breach of security obligations includes two types,one is breach of contract duty and the other is tort duty.The object of duty for breach of contract is limited to the owner who has a contractual relationship with the property service enterprise,and the principle of no-fault duty is implemented on the principle of attribution.The object of tort duty also includes a third party other than the owner,and the principle of attribution implements the principle of fault liability.In the relationship with the specific infringer,tenement bears subsidiary duty,and after assuming responsibility,it has the right to claim compensation from the infringer;Between the property service enterprise and the potential perpetrator,the property service enterprise shall give priority to assuming responsibility,and put the responsibility of the potential perpetrator second.