What is the legal responsibility of emergency hedging? Is this a crime? Emergency avoidance generally does not constitute a crime and does not require criminal responsibility. In order to protect the state, public interests, personal, property and other rights of oneself or others from the ongoing danger, those who have to take emergency actions to avoid danger and cause damage shall not be criminally responsible. If the emergency avoidance exceeds the necessary limit and causes undue damage, criminal responsibility shall be borne, but the punishment shall be mitigated or exempted. The provisions of the first paragraph on avoiding personal danger do not apply to people who have specific responsibilities in their posts and businesses. In order to protect the state, public interests, personal, property and other rights of oneself or others from the ongoing danger, those who have to take emergency actions to avoid danger and cause damage shall not be criminally responsible. Therefore, general emergency avoidance does not constitute a crime and does not need to bear criminal responsibility, but it may need to bear corresponding civil liability. However, it is conditional to recognize emergency hedging. Those who meet the emergency hedging conditions and cause damage do not constitute a crime and do not bear criminal responsibility. If the act of emergency avoidance exceeds the necessary limit and causes unnecessary damage, it constitutes a crime and shall bear criminal responsibility. In addition, emergency avoidance usually causes the loss of the legitimate interests of the third party, which may be personal injury or property loss. In principle, emergency evaders should compensate the third party for losses. If damage is caused by emergency hedging, the person who caused the danger shall bear civil liability, and the emergency hedging person shall not bear civil liability for compensation. If the emergency hedging behavior is caused by natural reasons, the emergency hedging person shall not bear or improperly bear the civil liability for compensation. However, if the emergency measures are improper or exceed the necessary limits, the emergency person shall still bear civil liability for compensation. If the dispute arising from emergency avoidance cannot be resolved, the victim may apply for arbitration, or even bring a lawsuit to the people's court to safeguard his legitimate rights and interests. If your situation is complicated, the website also provides online consultation service for lawyers, and you are welcome to have legal consultation.
Legal objectivity:
Article 21 of the Criminal Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) * * * In order to protect national interests, public interests, personal, property and other rights of oneself or others from being infringed by ongoing dangers, those who have to take emergency measures to avoid risks shall not be held criminally responsible. If the emergency avoidance exceeds the necessary limit and causes undue damage, criminal responsibility shall be borne, but the punishment shall be mitigated or exempted. The provisions of the first paragraph on avoiding personal danger do not apply to people who have specific responsibilities in their posts and businesses.