PPE

take off the safety helmet and get 60% off the compensation for construction injury

Mr. Gu, who was injured at the construction site, took the employer to the court and asked the employer to compensate him for the loss of more than 120000 yuan. A few days ago, the people’s Court of Jintan District of Changzhou City made a judgment that Mr. Gu was also responsible for his injury because he did not wear a safety helmet at the time of the accident. The court ruled that his employer Zhou should bear 60% of the compensation liability, and Mr. Gu was compensated more than 51000 yuan

in September 2015, Zhou, an individual boss, hired Mr. Gu, who was not qualified as a bricklayer, to repair the pier. On September 20 of the same year, because there were cracks on both sides of the gate pier, the tiles needed to be replaced and rebuilt. Mr. Gu stood at the 1.2m part of the scaffold rented by Zhou, took the old tiles from the top of the gate pier 3.5m high, and handed them to other people standing on the ground. When master Gu began to take out old tiles, his helmet fell to the ground. At that time, he felt that it was difficult to take out and deliver tiles by wearing a helmet. 1nstead of wearing a helmet, he handed the helmet to other people standing on the ground. When the seventh and eighth old tiles were taken, due to disrepair, the tiles and walls on the door pier fell down and hit the plaintiff on the head. The plaintiff fell to the ground and was injured. Later, the plaintiff was sent to the hospital for treatment and was diagnosed as left frontal lobe brain contusion and laceration with hematoma, right frontal lobe and left temporal lobe brain contusion and laceration, left frontotemporal subdural hematoma, traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, right occipital bone fracture and other injuries. 1n April 2016, Gu was hospitalized again. Gu spent more than 70000 yuan for the treatment

the people’s Court of Jintan District, Changzhou City, after hearing, held that if a labor relationship is formed between individuals, and the party providing the labor service is damaged due to the labor service itself, it shall bear the corresponding responsibility according to the respective faults of both parties. Mr. Gu provides labor service for Mr. Zhou. 1n the process of labor service, Mr. Zhou should be responsible for safety and labor protection for Mr. Gu’s professional activities. Mr. Zhou did not seriously review Mr. Gu’s qualification, which led to the plaintiff without tile worker qualification certificate engaging in relevant tile work, and under the condition that both sides of the door pier had cracks and certain danger, Mr. Gu did not stop the work in time after taking off the safety helmet, which led to the occurrence of damage and fault, We should be liable for the damage of master Gu. Master Gu was engaged in tile labor service without obtaining tile qualification certificate, and he did not understand the danger of partially cracked gate piers. He did not wear the safety helmet in time due to trouble after falling, and did not take necessary preventive measures. He also had some fault in the occurrence of damage, so Zhou’s liability for compensation should be reduced accordingly. Combined with the actual situation of this case, Zhou and Gu should bear 60% and 40% of the responsibility respectively. The court made the above judgment after finding out various losses

Back to list