Security obligations of operators in hotels, shopping malls, supermarkets, hotels and other public places.

The obligation of safety guarantee refers to the obligation of safety guarantee undertaken by the business operator for the personal and property safety of consumers, potential consumers or other people who enter the service place according to law. Article 1 198 of the Civil Code stipulates that the operators, managers or organizers of mass activities in hotels, shopping malls, banks, stations, airports, stadiums, entertainment places and other places of business are responsible for the security obligations. Those who fail to fulfill their security obligations and cause damage to others shall bear tort liability.

A, hotels, shopping malls, supermarkets, hotels and other public places operators' security obligations.

The obligation of safety guarantee refers to the obligation of safety guarantee undertaken by the business operator for the personal and property safety of consumers, potential consumers or other people who enter the service place according to law.

Civil code (202 1. 1. 1 came into force)

Article 1198 Operators, managers or organizers of mass activities in hotels, shopping malls, banks, railway stations, airports, stadiums, entertainment places and other places of business shall be responsible for the security obligations. Those who fail to fulfill their security obligations and cause damage to others shall bear tort liability.

If the behavior of a third party causes damage to others, the third party shall bear the tort liability; Operators, managers or organizers who fail to fulfill their security obligations shall bear corresponding supplementary responsibilities. Operators, managers or organizers may claim compensation from a third party after assuming supplementary responsibilities.

Second, the connotation of security obligations

Under the principle of good faith, the security obligation is based on the needs of fairness and justice. It is a legal obligation, and the obligor must fulfill the corresponding security obligation, which is an obligation of positive action. Those who violate the obligation of safety and security and cause damage to others shall bear corresponding responsibilities. In the principle of liability regulation, the principle of fault liability regulation should be applied to the safety guarantee obligation, and the injured party should bear the burden of proof that the obligor is at fault.

The subject of security obligation is the owners, operators and others who have the security obligation to enter a specific place where social activities are held, including natural persons, legal persons and other organizations, such as managers of public places such as hotels, shopping malls, supermarkets, hotels, banks, stations and entertainment places or organizers of mass activities. The common feature of this kind of discipline is that it is not easy to have actual control over the local area.

Article 1 198 of the Civil Code stipulates the security obligation in principle, but the criteria for judging the security obligation are not clear. According to the first paragraph of Article 6 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Laws in the Trial of Personal Injury Compensation Cases, if the security obligor fails to protect others within a reasonable limit, he shall bear the corresponding liability for compensation. According to this article, whether the responsible person has fulfilled the "safety guarantee obligation within a reasonable limit" has become the criterion for judging the responsibility of the safety guarantee obligor, but it is still vague to determine whether the safety guarantee obligor is at fault in judicial practice.

Second, the responsibility of the security obligor

There are two forms of tort liability for violating security obligations, namely direct liability and supplementary liability. First, direct liability is a form of liability in which the actor takes responsibility for the damage caused by his behavior because he fails to fulfill his duty of protection and care. For example, managers and organizers can reasonably control the potential damage risk without the intervention of a third party, but they don't have reasonable control, which leads to the occurrence of damage results. Second, supplementary responsibilities. It refers to the form of tort liability in which two or more actors violate legal obligations and cause damage to an infringee, or different actors cause the same damage to the rights of the infringee based on different behaviors, and each actor produces tort liability with the same content. The infringed party has several claims in turn, and the first claim is exercised first, and then the other claims are exercised.

That's all I made up.