2015 广西大学就业网

Passengers miss is the taxi driver to a serious injury claims dismissed passengers Miss beatings claim rental company was transferred Beijing morning news (reporter Huang Xiaoyu) the taxi arrived at the online orders, booking sites, but found the passengers hit another taxi, the driver actually dissatisfied passengers wounded. To this end, Mr. Liu will rent the passenger Lee’s driver to court, claim the loss of more than 13 yuan. Recently, the Huairou Court concluded the case and found that the two sides did not have the contract of carriage, and dismissed all the appeals of Mr. liu. It is understood that, in December 5, 2015, Mr. Liu by taxi software to attract a taxi home from work, but Mr. Liu’s colleagues have called the other taxi, the taxi driver Lee arrived at the designated place, Mr. Liu told Lee said with other colleagues take a taxi, and give appropriate economic compensation with lee. However, Lee did not agree, and after the dispute with Mr. Liu, it will be seriously injured, after the full rescue, Liu has just been out of danger. After the event, Mr. Liu sued the rental company in court with a paper petition. Liu believes that the transport contract between him and the rental company is established and effective after the receipt of Li. The defendant, as the carrier, should ensure the safety of the passengers in the transportation process. If the defendant defaults, he should bear the corresponding liabilities for breach of contract. Rental company identified that Liu is unilaterally terminated the contract of carriage, Lee wounding behavior occurred after the termination of the contract, the Department of Lee’s personal behavior, does not belong to the scope of the driver’s duties, the consequences of which has nothing to do with the rental company. After the court of Huairou Temple City Court held that Li’s personal behavior was the direct cause of the plaintiff’s injury, not in the implementation of the transport contract led to the plaintiff injured, the plaintiff asked the defendant to hire the company to undertake the breach of contract liability without legal basis. Therefore, the court dismissed all the claims of the plaintiff Mr. liu. News links about the car accident insurance may not pay for the Beijing morning news (reporter Huang Xiaoyu) with the recent "online booking taxi management service management Interim Measures" announced, Haidian court judge analysis predicted that the "measures" after the implementation of network about cars gained legal position, can be predicted that there will be a lot of disputes involving network about cars influx the court in the future. According to the "measures", in the traffic disputes of net car, the car platform company may become the subject of liability for compensation. The judge said that most of the registered vehicles are non operating vehicles at present, but according to the "measures", the vehicles engaged in the operation of the network should be registered as passenger vehicles, and obtain the network booking taxi transport certificate. The motor vehicle third party liability insurance clauses generally agreed that the car for family use, for the business of transport vehicles, the insurer will not bear the liability. Therefore, whether the insurance company can defend the exemption clause according to the exemption clause and also refuse to accept the insurance liability should also be unified. Enter Sina Financial shares] discussion

乘客爽约被出租车司机打至重伤 索赔诉求被驳回   乘客爽约遭暴打 索赔出租公司被驳   北京晨报讯(记者 黄晓宇)出租车网上接单,到达预约地点后,却发现乘客又打了别的出租车,感到不满的司机竟将乘客打伤。为此,乘客刘先生将司机李某所在的出租公司诉至法院,索赔各项损失13万余元。近日怀柔法院审结此案,认定双方并不存在运输合同关系,驳回了刘先生的全部诉求。   据了解,2015年12月5日,刘先生通过打车软件招揽出租车下班回家,不过刘先生的同事已叫来了其他出租,在出租车司机李某到达指定地点后,刘先生向李某表示要与同事搭乘其他出租车,并同意给予李某适当经济补偿。   不过李某不同意,并与刘先生发生争执后将其打成重伤,后经全力抢救,刘先生方才脱离生命危险。事后,刘先生一纸诉状将李某所在的出租公司告上法庭。刘先生认为,他与出租公司间的运输合同在李某接单后即成立并生效,被告作为承运人,应当保证承运旅客在运输过程中的安全。现被告违约,应承担相应的违约责任。   出租公司则辨称,是刘先生单方终止了承运合同,李某伤人的行为发生在承运合同终止之后,系李某的个人行为,不属于司机职务行为的范围,其造成的后果与出租公司无关。   怀柔法院庙城法庭审理后认为,李某的个人行为是原告致伤的直接原因,并非在履行运输合同中导致原告受伤,原告要求被告出租公司承担履行合同的违约责任无法律依据。因此,法院驳回了原告刘先生的全部诉讼请求。   新闻链接   网约车事故 保险可能不买单   北京晨报讯(记者 黄晓宇)随着近日《网络预约出租汽车经营服务管理暂行办法》的公布,海淀法院法官分析预测,《办法》施行后,网约车取得合法地位,可以预测今后会有大量涉网约车纠纷涌入法院。根据《办法》规定,网约车的交通事故纠纷中,网约车平台公司有可能成为赔偿责任的承担主体。   法官表示,目前绝大部分网约车的登记性质为非营运车辆,但根据《办法》规定,从事网约车运营的车辆应当登记为客运车辆,并取得网络预约出租汽车运输证。而机动车第三者责任保险条款一般均约定汽车为家庭自用,对从事营业运输的车辆,保险人将不承担赔偿责任。因此对于网约车,保险公司能否根据该免责条款进行抗辩,从而拒绝承担保险责任,也需统一裁判标准。 进入【新浪财经股吧】讨论相关的主题文章: