Grassroots lawyers also have spring

Chapter 636 Confrontation 2
Of course, it is still too early to make a decision for the layman to watch the excitement and the expert to see the doorway.

If this case were to be prosecuted after September [-], it is estimated that the defendant would not say so, because the "Supreme People's Court's Regulations on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Work-related Injury Insurance Administrative Cases" will be issued at that time. Article [-] of the Regulations Item ([-]) of Paragraph [-] clearly stipulates that “The employing unit subcontracts the contracted business to an organization or natural person who does not have the qualifications of the subject of employment in violation of laws and regulations, and the employees hired by the organization or natural person are injured or killed due to work while engaging in the contracted business. , the employing unit is the unit that bears the responsibility for work-related injury insurance.”

At this time, both the judicial practice and the labor department are crossing the river by feeling the stones. For the industry chaos that has emerged for special entities such as construction companies and mining companies, that is, how to compensate for the damage caused to laborers during the process of illegal subcontracting and subcontracting The problem is looking for a legal basis and a solution, and the relevant departments are also looking for remedies for the workers.

In fact, even after the Supreme People’s Court promulgated the “Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court Concerning Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Administrative Cases of Work-related Injury Insurance”, in practice, it is still difficult for construction enterprises to undertake work-related injury insurance liabilities. .

It was not until April [-] that the Imperial High Court and the Imperial Labor and Personnel Dispute Arbitration Commission released the "Answers to Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Labor Dispute Cases" based on extensive research and in-depth demonstrations. .

Wang Chuan has been listening to the other party's defense opinions, and from time to time writes down the key points on paper, and at the same time thinks about the countermeasures.

"The plaintiff's proof!" said the female judge.

“The first piece of evidence, the traffic accident certificate and the traffic police interrogation record, proves that the plaintiff’s son Ma Zhe died in a car accident because the defendant’s staff violated traffic regulations and forced him to work on the side of the road during the bridge construction project contracted by the defendant. The party responsible and Ma Zhe each bear 50.00% of the responsibility.

The second piece of evidence is the previous judgment issued by your court, which proves that your court has ordered the defendant to assume the main responsibility of the employer. Combined with the newly issued "Opinions on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance", the plaintiff understands that the main responsibility of the employer is work-related injury insurance responsibility.

The third piece of evidence is the death certificate of Ma Zhe issued by the police station, and the certificate of family members, proving that Ma Zhe died in a traffic accident. In addition, his family status is that his parents are still alive, and he has one brother and one brother.

The fourth piece of evidence, the notice of non-acceptance, proves that the plaintiff has submitted an application to the Labor Arbitration Commission for the dispute over the work-related injury insurance liability between the plaintiff and the defendant, but the commission does not accept the application.

The proof is over! "Wang Chuan said.

"The defendant cross-examines evidence!" the female judge said in a well-mannered manner.

"The first piece of evidence, the traffic accident certificate and the traffic police interrogation record, was approved by the defendant.

The second piece of evidence, we agree with the judgment, but we believe that your court ruled that the defendant should bear the main responsibility of the employer, not necessarily the liability of work-related injury insurance. From the content of the judgment, your court has confirmed that the defendant and the plaintiff are in an employment relationship, and the employer is the main body. Liability should be understood as employer responsibility.

The third piece of evidence, the supporting documents issued by the police station, was approved by the defendant.

The fourth piece of evidence, the notice of inadmissibility, was accepted by the defendant.

Cross-examination is complete! " said the defendant's lawyer.

"The defendant presents evidence!" the female judge said unhurriedly after the clerk finished recording.

"The first piece of evidence, the (2012) Mi Min Chu Zi No. xxx Judgment, proves that your court has determined that the defendant and Ma Zhe have an employment relationship and no labor relationship, and have ordered the defendant to bear, except for the 50.00 borne by the perpetrator. % liability, another 50.00% liability. The defendant should not bear the liability of work-related injury insurance.

The second piece of evidence, the bank payment certificate, proves that the defendant has paid the judgment to the plaintiff.The plaintiff should not require the defendant to bear the liability for work-related injury insurance based on the same fact. Such requirements violate the principle of non bis in idem.

The third piece of evidence is the record of money transferred from the party responsible for the accident to the plaintiff, which proves that the plaintiff has received compensation from the party responsible for the accident.

The proof is over! " said the defendant's lawyer.

"The plaintiff cross-examines evidence!" the female officer looked up at Wang Chuan after flipping through the case files for a while.

"The first piece of evidence is authentic, legal, and relevant, but the purpose of the proof is not. This piece of evidence can only prove that the court found that the two parties had an employment relationship, but at the same time, the court did not deny that the defendant should bear the responsibility for work-related injury insurance.

The second piece of evidence, the bank payment certificate, was recognized by the plaintiff.However, this case does not involve the second instance of the first instance, and the legal basis for the prosecution in this case is different from the previous cases.

The third piece of evidence, the transfer record of the perpetrator, is recognized for its authenticity and legality, but not for its relevance.The compensation paid to the plaintiff by the party responsible for the accident is based on the facts of the traffic accident and the payment to the plaintiff in accordance with the relevant regulations on compensation for personal injury.

The legal relationship between the traffic accident case and this case is different, and the legal basis for the traffic accident compensation and the undertaking of work-related injury insurance liability is different.

Cross-examination is complete! "Wang Chuan said.

"Plaintiff, where is the bridge construction project you are talking about?" asked the female judge.

"In Miyun XX." Wang Chuan said.

"According to the content of the judgment issued by this court, the defendant subcontracted part of the project to Li Qiang, who was not involved in the case, and Li Qiang, a natural person, did not have construction qualifications; Ma Zhe was hired by Li Qiang to work on the bridge project site. After that, Ma Zhe worked at the bridge project site. A traffic accident occurred.

Defendant, do you have any objection to the above facts! " asked the female judge.

"There is no objection to the above facts!" said the defendant's lawyer.

"Plaintiff, do you have any objections?" asked the female judge.

"No objection!" Wang Chuan said.

"Plaintiff, what is the calculation base for the one-off work-related death subsidy and funeral subsidy? How are they calculated?" asked the female judge.

"The calculation base for the one-off work-related death subsidy is 24565 yuan, and the calculation base for the funeral subsidy is 3921 yuan.

工亡补助金计算依据为二零一二年度全国城镇居民人均可支配收入24565×20=491300元，丧葬补助金为二零一二年马哲所在省份职工平均工资3921×6=23526元。”王川道。

"Defendant, do you have any objections!" the female judge asked after bowing her head and taking notes.

"The defendant has no objection to the calculation standard! But the defendant believes that it should not bear the liability for work-related injury insurance, and the defendant has already paid compensation to the plaintiff." The defendant's lawyer emphasized.

"What is the legal basis for the plaintiff to believe that the defendant should bear the liability for work-related injury insurance?" asked the female judge.

In fact, she is also muttering in her heart now that legal regulations always have a certain lag, and construction companies and mining companies have illegally subcontracted and subcontracted for a long time, and the interests of workers are often damaged by this. Such a good relief method, most workers and business owners will choose to solve it in private after the accident, after all, it is the last word to get the money quickly.

Now that the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security has issued a new regulatory document, this case is the first case after the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security issued the document, which made her feel dizzy.

(End of this chapter)