The man fell from the hotel to avoid catching the rape, and the rapist and the hotel were claimed millions. How did the court decide?

Married Xia Ming and Li Yan checked into a hotel, but Li Yan's husband Liu Wei led them to "catch him". After they got dressed, Xia Ming opened the window, turned it over, stood outside the air conditioner, and accidentally fell to the sixth floor and died. Therefore, Xia Ming's family took Li Yan and his wife, friends who helped catch the rape and the hotel to court, claiming 1.3 million yuan.

The family of Xia, who was claimed by the rapist and the hotel, said that Xia came to the hotel because of Li, and then Liu and his friends blocked him in the room and threatened him. Xia was forced to climb out of the hotel window, trying to escape from the window, only to fall to his death.

At the same time, Xia's family also believes that hotel operators should be liable for compensation. As an operator engaged in accommodation business activities, hotels should fulfill their statutory security obligations to ensure the personal safety of guests. Liu and his party are neither hotel residents nor relevant law enforcement departments. Why can they enter the hotel with dignity, thus threatening Xia's personal safety?

Xia lives on the sixth floor of the hotel. The window hotel on the 6th floor was not equipped with protective measures, and the windows were not treated with relevant safety. Normal hotel windows can only open a small part, which can't hold 1 person at all. If the hotel fulfills its corresponding security obligations, the falling building incident in summer can be avoided. Accordingly, the defendant's * * tort caused Xia Ming to fall from the building and should be jointly and severally liable for compensation.

Court: climbing the window is the independent behavior of the deceased and has nothing to do with others. According to the evidence in the case, Xia climbed out of the window before the defendant Liu and others entered the crime room. As a person with full capacity for civil conduct, we should be aware of the height between the room on the sixth floor and the ground and the possible dangers of climbing out of the window on the sixth floor. Therefore, the fall of the building was caused by Xia climbing out of the window on the sixth floor, which was his own behavior. There is no legal causal relationship between Xia's death and Li, Liu and others. Xia's family asked him to bear the liability for compensation, which lacked basis and the court refused to support it.

Whether the hotel is at fault depends on whether it has fulfilled its security obligations. The obligation of security mainly refers to the obligation of units engaged in accommodation, catering and other business activities to protect others from personal injury within a reasonable limit. Specifically, if there is a national mandatory standard, it shall meet the requirements of the mandatory standard; If there is no national mandatory standard, it shall conform to the industry standard or the reasonable safety standard for public activities in the place.

As for the setting of hotel rooms, there is no mandatory standard for the window width of operating hotels at present, and there is no relevant industry express specification. Therefore, reasonable room setting standards should ensure the safety of reasonable activities of the general public in the rooms and ensure that no foreseeable and preventable dangers occur.

After on-site inspection, the height of the window sill of the incident room met the corresponding national mandatory standards, and the hotel also installed a limit device on the window and posted a reminder sign to close the window, so the hotel has fulfilled its corresponding security obligations. There is no basis for the Xia family to ask the hotel to bear the liability for compensation. The court refused to support it.

The court of first instance rejected all the claims of the Xia family, and the Xia family refused to accept the appeal. The court of second instance made a judgment and upheld the original judgment.