HANGZHOU, China, April 15 (Xinhua) -- (Reporters Zhao Xiaoyan and Correspondent Nan Xuan) Outdoor activities, known for their thrill, adventure, and challenges, are highly favored by "hikers." But when accidents happen on such trips, who should bear the responsibility? On April 14, 2015, the Nanhu District Court in Jiaxing, Zhejiang Province, issued a first-instance verdict in the city’s first-ever right-to-life dispute case triggered by the accidental death of a "hiker."
The deceased, Liu, was 32 years old and the only child in his family. He was an avid outdoor sports enthusiast. On September 17, 2014, he participated in an outdoor activity to summit the main peak of Siming Mountain. While descending, he suddenly felt unwell and was sent to the hospital, where he later passed away. The diagnosis was heat exhaustion (commonly known as "heatstroke"). After the incident, Liu’s parents and wife sued Chen, the owner of an outdoor activity company in Jiaxing, demanding compensation of more than 240,000 yuan for their losses.
According to the plaintiffs, around 3 p.m. on the day of the incident, Liu reported feeling unwell via walkie-talkie to the defendant, but the defendant said it was nothing serious and told him to continue walking. However, Liu’s discomfort worsened, and he drank some water and ate some raisins. "In fact, the deceased was already suffering from heatstroke at that time," argued the plaintiffs. They believed that if he had rested in time, his condition might not have deteriorated, but those around him did not provide appropriate assistance.
The plaintiffs argued that Chen operated an outdoor sports company and frequently promoted his company and its products within outdoor activity communities. He also often organized outdoor activities and charged fees. Liu had signed up for the Siming Mountain hiking event through the WeChat platform of Chen’s company.
The plaintiffs’ lawyer stated that Chen, the defendant, was the organizer of the activity. With extensive experience in outdoor activities, he should have correctly assessed Liu’s physical discomfort during the climb rather than insisting he continue. As Liu’s condition worsened, Chen failed to take proper measures or provide medications for treatment. Therefore, the defendant bore secondary responsibility for Liu’s death.
The defense argued that Chen was not the organizer of the activity; the trip was spontaneously arranged among the hikers. "A few hikers were particularly eager to visit Siming Mountain, so they went on their own initiative," the lawyer said. The defense also submitted an expense report proving that the cost of the trip was covered by 11 participants themselves. "The plaintiff claimed in the complaint that the defendant organized the trip for profit by charging fees, but we did not charge anything."
The defense asserted that the accident was not directly caused by Chen, and all legal liability should rest with the deceased. Regarding the cause of death, the defense claimed that Liu died of heat exhaustion due to his obesity and dehydration.
After reviewing the case, the court concluded that the recruitment post for this activity was published on the WeChat platform of Chen’s club. It clearly stated that the activity fee should be transferred to Chen’s bank or Alipay account, with notification to Chen after the payment. Additionally, the club had a fixed location, website, and frequently posted to organize outdoor activities. Although it was not a registered social group or enterprise, based on the facts of the case, the court determined that the club was an organization with Chen as the core and a relatively fixed membership. As a key member, Chen was entitled to and responsible for the club's rights and obligations.
However, the court also held that although the activity was initiated and organized by the club, it clearly exhibited characteristics of outdoor activities during its implementation: participants had no hierarchical relationships, freely formed groups, acted voluntarily and equally, contributed equal funds, managed themselves, and involved no commercial operations or profit-making. The activity inherently carried certain risks, which were known to all participants. The principle of voluntary assumption of risk and self-responsibility is a widely accepted social norm and public ethic in the outdoor activities community. The court believed this unwritten but commonly respected code among outdoor enthusiasts should be upheld.
The Nanhu District Court concluded that the primary causes of Liu’s death were the inherent risks of outdoor activities and his personal physical condition, and thus the majority of responsibility lay with him. However, the court also noted that organizers of group activities have a duty to ensure safety. The club, during its initial recruitment and organization, overlooked possible weather conditions and potential symptoms among participants. It failed to remind participants to carry heatstroke prevention and cooling medications or adjust their activity pace according to individual physical conditions. This constituted a very minor degree of negligence. Taking all circumstances into account, the court ruled that the defendant should compensate the three plaintiffs an additional 20,000 yuan, on top of the medical expenses already paid.