Falling objects from high altitude is the principle of inversion of evidence. Then, I will introduce you in detail what the principle of inversion of evidence is. The inversion of the burden of proof means that the plaintiff's claim is not proved by evidence, but the defendant bears the burden of proof. (1) There are mainly the following six situations: 1. Patent infringement litigation caused by product manufacturing method invention patent. "In the event of an infringement dispute, if the invention patent is a manufacturing method of a new product, the unit or individual that manufactures the same product shall provide proof of its manufacturing method." If the defendant can't prove that the manufacturing method of his product is different from the patent, it is presumed that his behavior is an infringement and he should bear the result of losing the case. 2. Tort litigation for damages caused by highly dangerous operations. "Those who engage in high altitude, high pressure, inflammable, explosive, toxic, radioactive and high-speed means of transport that are highly dangerous to the surrounding environment and cause damage to others shall bear civil liability." "If it can be proved that the damage was intentionally caused by the victim, it will not bear civil liability." But the burden of proof can only be borne by the defendant. 3. Litigation for damages caused by environmental pollution. "Whoever violates the provisions of the state on environmental protection and pollution prevention and pollutes the environment and causes damage to others shall bear civil liability according to law." Any unit that causes the above-mentioned environmental pollution and causes damage to others' personal or property shall bear civil liability according to law, which is also a liability without fault. However, the defendant can prove that the damage caused by environmental pollution is caused by force majeure or the intentional or negligent actions of the victim himself and a third party, and the defendant is not liable. 4. Infringement litigation in which buildings or other facilities, as well as shelving and hanging objects on buildings collapse, fall off and cause damage to people. If damage is caused by the above reasons, its owner or manager shall bear civil liability, but if there is evidence to prove that he is not at fault, he can be exempted from liability. 5. Infringement litigation for the damage caused by raising animals. "If the raised animals cause damage to others, the animal keeper or manager shall bear civil liability; If the damage is caused by the fault of the victim, the animal keeper or manager shall not bear civil liability; If damage is caused by the fault of a third person, the third person shall bear civil liability. " The business operator shall guarantee the quality, performance, use and expiration date of the goods or services it provides under the normal use of goods or services; However, consumers already know that there are defects before purchasing the goods or accepting the services, except that the existence of the defects does not violate the mandatory provisions of the law. Where an operator indicates the quality of goods or services by advertisements, product descriptions, physical samples or other means, it shall ensure that the actual quality of the goods or services it provides is consistent with the indicated quality. If a consumer finds a defect in the durable goods such as motor vehicles, computers, televisions, refrigerators, air conditioners, washing machines or other services provided by the operator within six months from the date of accepting the goods or services, and there is a dispute, the operator shall bear the burden of proof on the defect. In the tort litigation caused by medical behavior, the legal basis for the implementation of "inversion of burden of proof" is mainly the unequal status of doctors and patients and the asymmetric information between doctors and patients, which makes it difficult for patients to give evidence. Since April 1, 22, the reform of the way of proof has been implemented in the litigation of medical tort in China. Patients will no longer bear the burden of proof on the causal relationship between medical behavior and damage results and whether there is any fault in the medical process, but will be borne by medical institutions. This change comes from "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Litigation" published on December 21st, 21. It is stipulated that the medical institution shall bear the burden of proof for the infringement lawsuit caused by medical behavior that there is no causal relationship between medical behavior and damage results and whether there is any fault in the medical process. This is just the opposite of the way of "whoever claims, who gives evidence" in the Civil Procedure Law, that is, one party puts forward the claim and the other party bears the burden of proof. This is commonly called "inversion of burden of proof". Many people don't understand this provision and mistakenly believe that the patient does not need to bear any burden of proof. In this regard, the person in charge of the First People's Court of the Supreme People's Court, when answering a reporter's question from the People's Court Daily, clearly pointed out that this provision contains at least the following three meanings: (1) Patients should bear the initial burden of proof. (2) The burden of proof can be transferred. (3) Determine the basis for the transfer of responsibilities. Legal objectivity:
Article 123 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China
In the event of a dispute due to environmental pollution or ecological damage, the actor shall bear the burden of proof for the circumstances in which he is not liable or mitigated according to the law and there is no causal relationship between his behavior and the damage.
Article 1245 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China
If the animals raised cause damage to others, the animal keeper or manager shall bear the tort liability;
however, if it can be proved that the damage was caused by the intentional or gross negligence of the infringed party, the liability may not be assumed or mitigated.