论文部分内容阅读
备受社会各界关注的深圳“好来居高空抛物案”在近两年后终于迎来了一审判决。一审法院驳回了原告对73名业主的赔偿要求,同时认为物业服务公司未能尽力履行职责,判决其承担30%的责任。本人认为此案在没有查清关系到影响责任认定的一些基本事实,没有准确界定物业服务企业在物业服务当中所应承担的职责之前,就做出如此判决确有许多不妥之处。
Much attention of all sectors of society in Shenzhen “good place to stay high altitude parabolic SAR ” in the last two years finally ushered in the first instance verdict. The court of first instance dismissed the plaintiff ’s claim for compensation to 73 owners and at the same time held that the property service company failed to fulfill its duty and ruled that it should bear 30% of the responsibility. I think the case did not find out some of the basic facts that affect the determination of responsibility, did not accurately define the property service companies in the property services which should assume the responsibility, to make such a decision, there are many inappropriate.