Unlicensed decorator electrocuted and employer fined 120000

On May 7, 1 learned from the court of Chancheng District, Foshan city that Feng, born in the 1980s, wanted to decorate his factory and do knitting business. Unexpectedly, he was electrocuted and died three days after he started work without a license. Subsequently, Chancheng Safety Supervision Bureau imposed an administrative penalty of 120000 yuan on Feng, who contracted the decoration project to an individual who did not have the conditions for safe production or the corresponding qualifications, causing a production safety accident. Feng refused to accept the punishment decision and filed an administrative lawsuit with Chancheng court to request the cancellation of the punishment decision. After the first and second trial, Feng’s claim was rejected

in June last year, Mr. Feng contracted out the water, electricity and gas pipe installation project of the factory building he rented to operate the knitting industry to a Liang, who called himself “Contractor”. A Liang handed over the cement construction part to the worker a Fang. However, on the third day of construction, that is, on June 7 last year, a Fang was electrocuted while using an electric ground drill in the plant

it was verified afterwards that a Liang had an electrician’s certificate, but it had expired, while a fang had no skill certificate. On September 30 last year, Chancheng Safety Supervision Bureau made the “decision on administrative punishment”, which imposed an administrative penalty of 120000 yuan on the ground that Feng contracted the decoration project to a unit or individual that did not have the conditions for safe production or corresponding qualifications, causing production safety accidents

Feng refused to accept the punishment decision. He filed a lawsuit to Chancheng Court on November 18 last year and made a judgment of rejecting the application in the first instance. 1n February this year, Feng appealed to Foshan (real estate) 1ntermediate People’s court

the court held that although the safety supervision bureau did not submit the accident investigation report and reply materials within the time limit of the first instance, there were defects, but those materials only proved the internal process of the Safety Supervision Bureau in dealing with the accident, and did not have a substantial impact on Feng’s rights. There were defects, but they did not constitute illegal procedures

our website solemnly declares that this article is reprinted by network media, only representing the author’s point of view, and has nothing to do with our website. 1f the information column articles and comments violate your legal rights, please call to let us know and we will deal with them in time

Back to list