On The Judicial Recognition Of The Tort Liability For Violating The Obligation Of Safety Protection In Tourist Attractions ——Take The Case Of Li And Others Suing A Village Committee For Tort Liability As An Example

The security obligation of tourist attractions is the innovation and development of modern tort law,and the purpose of the establishment of the security obligation system is to reasonably distribute the non-major dangers arising from social interaction activities to the perpetrator and the victim respectively.Therefore,how to determine the content and limit of the safety protection obligation of tourist attractions is the key and difficulty in the tort liability case of breaching the safety protection obligation.This article takes the case of Li and others suing a village committee for violation of security obligations and tort liability disputes.According to the trial of the case,the focus of the case is summarized as: 1.Whether a village committee violated its security obligations;2.A certain Whether there is a causal relationship between the village committee and Wu’s death;3.Whether a village committee is at fault for Wu’s death.In the process of analyzing the disputed focus,combined with trial practice and theories,the safety guarantee obligations of tourist attractions are summarized as the obligation to prevent the occurrence of danger,the obligation to eliminate the danger and the obligation to provide reasonable assistance.On the basis of this induction,taking into consideration "whether the tourist scenic spot can reasonably foresee the occurrence of danger","the cost of the tourist scenic spot to prevent and avoid the occurrence of the danger",and "the size of the victim’s damage due to the realization of the danger" as the factors of consideration,the tourism scenic spot is reasonably determined.The content and limit of the security obligation of the scenic spot.At the same time,when arguing whether there is a causal relationship between a village committee and the victim’s damage,this article distinguishes between factual causation and legal causation.When analyzing whether a village committee is at fault for the damage to the victim,it is advocated that as long as a village committee violates its safety and security obligations,it can be determined that there is a fault,and no repeated evaluation of the fault of a village committee is necessary.Because both the victim himself and a village committee were at fault for the damage,this paper,after comparing the faults and causal force of the two,combined with the discretion of the judge,believes that the judgments of the first and second instance of this case are justified.Finally,in order to balance the rights and interests of the tourist attractions and the victims,this paper proposes that "whether the danger comes from the victim himself","whether the victim is at fault for the occurrence or expansion of the danger",and "whether the victim can control the occurrence of the danger" as tourism Suggestions on the reasons for the reduction of liability of the scenic spot.