How to treat Mr. Lin, the victim of nanny arson, claiming 65.438+0.3 billion from Greentown?

This case has caused a lot of public opinion. The reason for claiming 1.3 million yuan is probably due to the poor supervision of Greentown, so it is not bad to be responsible for 30%. The larger the base, the more money you can lose. In this case, the nanny was mainly responsible for the arson, but she was completely incapable of compensation.

Although I didn't see the complaint, according to experience and Chinese laws, a large part of the 654.38 billion+300 million in the litigation request must be material and spiritual compensation, not human life compensation. Mr. Lin's house was originally a tens of millions of luxury houses, and the finance inside the luxury house is of course valuable. Mental damage compensation, not to mention other rights protection expenses and lost time expenses.

The amount of this lawsuit is indeed very large, but it is foreseeable that the court will not support so much. Even if Mr. Lin really proves that his loss is 65.438+0.3 billion yuan, according to the principle of tort liability fault, the nanny, as the person directly responsible, should bear the main responsibility, and even if the other defendants are at fault, they only bear the secondary responsibility. So 65438+300 million is more of an attitude, and at the same time, in order to expand the influence of the case.

Announcement of Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court

2065438+May 2008, Lin Shengbin filed a civil lawsuit against Greentown property, development and construction, supervision and fire protection, claiming 65438+300 million yuan. On April 2, 20 19, the Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court informed that Beenzino Lin, the family member of the nanny arson victim, had reached a mediation agreement with Greentown Property Services Group Co., Ltd. after mediation by the court.

Plaintiffs Lin Shengbin, Zhu Hengren and Xu Meizhi in the original trial and defendants Greentown Property Service Group Co., Ltd., Hangzhou Greentown Haiqi Industry Co., Ltd., China Construction Third Engineering Group Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Greentown Oriental Architectural Design Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Zhongxing Engineering Construction Supervision Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Zhuan Construction Group Co., Ltd. and Hangzhou Huaan Fire Technology Service Co., Ltd.

Plaintiffs Lin Shengbin, Zhu Hengren and Xu Meizhi applied for recusal from the dispute over the right to life of Shanghai Yang Chen Home Economics Service Co., Ltd. on March 9, 2009;

The prosecution of six defendants, including China Construction Third Engineering Group Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Greentown Oriental Architectural Design Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Zhongxing Engineering Construction Supervision Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Zhu 'an Construction Group Co., Ltd., Hangzhou Huaan Fire Technology Service Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Yang Chen Home Economics Service Co., Ltd., was approved by our hospital.

After mediation by our court, plaintiffs Lin Shengbin, Zhu Hengren and Xu Meizhi have reached a mediation agreement with defendants Greentown Property Services Group Co., Ltd. and Hangzhou Greentown Haiqi Industrial Co., Ltd. on this dispute, and Greentown Property Services Group Co., Ltd. and Hangzhou Greentown Haiqi Industrial Co., Ltd. have fully fulfilled their obligations stipulated in the mediation agreement.