Accuser Zhang Mou and the accused are accompanied draw company oral agreement, zhang Mou cars of all mulberry tower accept are entrusted accompany drive a company to be rented external, zhang Mou is handed in accompany drive a company 300 yuan / lunar administration fee. Accompany after drove a company to rent this car the accused Wang Mou (Wang Mou misses the court increases his to serve as corespondent) . Wang Mou gives Shanghai Li Mou this car pledge however, and to Li Mou loan 40 thousand yuan. After Zhang Mou is informed this matter, to public security mechanism the newspaper concludes the case. To reduce a loss, resumptive car, zhang Mou and accompany drove company staff to pay Wang Mou to Shanghai together to Li Mou " loan " 40 thousand yuan. After the event, zhang Mou drives a company to compensate for accuser with the requirement is being sued to accompany to the court for this all sorts of losses 40 thousand multivariate.

In cognizance, the accused is accompanied drive company argue to say, accompany driving is to entrust acting relation between company and accuser, accompany before car is rental drive a company to already examined Id of tenant Wang Mou and drive the authenticity of certificate, accompany drive a company not to have fault. And accuser already reported a case to the security authorities to public security mechanism after be cheated at car, can take a car through proper approach, accuser answers car to fasten its individual behavior to Li Mou atone for, wang Mou is actual infringer, accuser should to Wang Mou claim for compensation, do not answer to accompany drive a company to hold the right.

After the case is tried, court of first instance is maintained, some hire car should press the accused king to be returned about still bear rent car, its should assume reason cannot return return vehicle and give a car advocate namely accuser Zhang Mou causes losing liability to pay compensation. Accuser drives a company through accompanying its car of all the carry that be not battalion are used at renting to manage, and accompany drive a company to know perfectly well this circumstance, and the qualification that its do not have rental car and collection administration fee, car rents is the premise that this case produces, the loss that causes possibly because this is bilateral finally to this case all is put have fault, bilateral should accordingly fault partakes responsibility. If Wang Mou cannot recoup total loss, accompany drive a company to assume partial complement liability to pay compensation. Accordingly, court of first instance is sentenced your, wang Mou recoups accuser loss, accompany those who drive a company to cannot perform compensatory obligation part to Wang Mou 40% assume liability to pay compensation.

Case classics 2 careful, 2 careful court thinks, accuser and accompany drive contract of period of travel of company presence car to concern, accompany drive a company to be travel period person, accuser fastens client, the behavior enroach on that Wang Mou reachs foregift hire car the right of accuser. Basis contract law sets the 421st times " travel period person concludes with the 3rd person of the contract, travel period person enjoys the right directly to this contract, assume obligation. Obligation of nonperformance of the 3rd person causes client to be damaged, travel period person ought to assume damages responsibility, but the except that travel period person and client have an agreement additionally " , reason accompanies the action of break a contact that draws a company to need pair of Wang Mou to cause Zhang Mou to be damaged this one consequence to assume liability to pay compensation. Accompany sea of the upgrade before driving company and Zhang Mou to handle, fail to prevent Zhang Mou to pay 40 thousand yuan of behavior to reduce a loss, reason cannot be absolved accompany drive company liability to pay compensation. 2 careful court maintained first instance to adjudicate.
Previous12 Next