infringement disputes

Cause of action: Dispute over liability for motor vehicle traffic accidents

Case No.: (2013) Su Min Zhong Zi No. 5

Overview of the case: We entrusted the plaintiff to transport the goods, and the plaintiff and defendant signed a freight contract to entrust the defendant to transport the goods. During the transportation of the goods, a fire accident occurred, causing damage to the goods. Now, the plaintiff and defendant have an infringement dispute over the damage to the goods. As an independent third party, we request the defendant to participate in the lawsuit and compensate us for the loss of the goods.

After the lawyer's intervention, the court ruled in favor of our request and ordered the defendant to bear joint and several liability for our losses of over 110000 yuan.

Cause of action: Dispute over right to life, right to health, right to the body

Case number: (2018) Yue 0605 Min Chu 19601

Overview of the case: Defendant 1, a domestic service company, acted as an intermediary and hired Defendant 2 as a home caregiver to take care of the baby. However, Defendant 2 did not take appropriate rescue measures when the baby choked on milk, indirectly causing the baby's death. The defendant is now requested to bear the liability for infringement damages.

After the intervention of the lawyer, the court ruled in favor of our claim for losses and held the other party liable for 50% of the losses. Defendant 2 was ordered to pay death compensation of over 430000 yuan and mental damages compensation of 50000 yuan. Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 were jointly liable for 10% of their debts.

Cause of action: Dispute over reputation rights

Case number: (2017) Yue 0605 Min Chu 15991

Case Overview: The plaintiff and defendant hold different opinions on public affairs in residential communities, and there was a verbal conflict between the two parties in a WeChat group

After the lawyer's intervention, the court ruled in favor of our claim. Although my language was a bit extreme, it recognized our just stance and did not consider it to constitute infringement of reputation. Therefore, the court rejected the other party's lawsuit request.