Wireless road weather

The station will give you a choice-full refund or transfer to another train. The connecting flight may not be the same day, or there may be no seats. You are really unhappy, you can sue, but the railway department will tell you that the suspension is due to force majeure.

Trains are usually stopped because of extreme weather, which leads to the interruption of the line and the inability to run. Nobody wants this irresistible factor.

My opinions on how to compensate for the damage caused by the delay of high-speed rail and bullet trains are as follows:

First, this kind of accident belongs to the fault delay in the railway transport contract. How consumers claim compensation should be based on the relevant provisions of the Contract Law on passenger transport contracts.

Article 290 of the Contract Law stipulates: "The carrier shall safely transport passengers and goods to the agreed place within the agreed period or within a reasonable period." In this high-speed rail accident, the carrier, that is, the railway party, violated this provision of the Contract Law, causing damage to passengers and constituting the liability for breach of contract.

Secondly, according to the above actual situation, the cause of the accident is that the 220 kV Xiaoxin line under the jurisdiction of Handan Power Supply Company falls off the power line across the Beijing-Guangzhou high-speed railway, which leads to the equipment failure between Handan East and Anyang East of the Beijing-Guangzhou high-speed railway, resulting in the delay of the high-speed train. In this regard, the railway may think that the reason for the delay is a third person.

It is the responsibility of the power supply enterprise, not their own responsibility, so no compensation will be paid. This claim does not conform to the provisions of the contract law. In this regard, the provisions of Article 12 1 of the Contract Law should be applied, namely: "If one party breaches the contract for the reason of a third party, it shall be liable to the other party for breach of contract.

Disputes between the parties and the third party shall be settled according to law or in accordance with the agreement. "This is the reason for the third party to compensate for breach of contract. It should be noted that the provisions of contract law and tort liability law are different on how to bear the liability for damages caused by a third party.

The above provisions of the contract law mean that the breaching party shall bear the liability for compensation first, and can recover from the third party after compensation. Article 28 of the Tort Liability Law stipulates: "If damage is caused by a third person, the third person shall bear the tort liability." The actor who caused the actual damage shall not be liable for compensation.

It should be noted that in the provisions of the Tort Liability Law on highly dangerous liability, there is no provision on the third party's cause of damage compensation for high-speed means of transport, and it is not clear whether the provisions of Article 28 are applicable, because there is no exemption clause for tort liability applying the principle of no-fault liability for product liability, environmental pollution liability, animal damage liability, and damage caused by a third party.

Instead, they assume untrue joint and several liability, and then recover after taking responsibility. Comparatively speaking, the damage of high-speed vehicles also belongs to no-fault liability, which is difficult to be interpreted as the exemption stipulated in Article 28. It is not easy for railway enterprises to claim exemption from tort liability according to Article 28 of Tort Liability Law.

Third, there is no precedent for how much railway enterprises should compensate passengers for this big delay. In my opinion, it should be determined according to Article 1 13 of the Contract Law, and bear a relatively suitable fixed amount and be liable for compensation.

Drawing lessons from the practice of flight delay and considering the experience and mental pain of passengers during the delay, I tend to set the compensation amount within 500- 1000 yuan.

Fourthly, it has been suggested that this high-speed rail delay not only constitutes the liability for breach of contract, but also constitutes the tort liability, which constitutes the concurrence of tort liability and breach of contract liability. In this regard, my view is that it is certainly beneficial to apply tort law to determine the liability for compensation, which is conducive to the protection of passengers, because tort liability has compensation for mental damage, while breach of contract liability has no compensation for mental damage.

However, judging from the current situation, it seems that the damage is still within the scope of breach of contract. If the passenger's right to health is obviously damaged, for example, due to heatstroke, it can be considered as infringement, which constitutes a concurrence of responsibilities and requests compensation for personal injury and mental damage. If there is no obvious damage to the passenger's right to health, it is safer to determine the liability for compensation in the liability for breach of contract.