On March 26, 2025, the second instance judgment of the death of a female cleaner at the University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital, which had previously attracted public attention, was reached. The Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court ruled that the height of the rooftop railing at the point where Hu fell did not meet the standard requirements, and the hospital should bear approximately 10% of the compensation responsibility for the accident. The court determined that the hospital should compensate 190000 yuan. In November 2022, Hu fell to his death on the rooftop of the 7th floor of the Shenzhen Hospital of the University of Hong Kong. After investigation, the police ruled out the criminal case. Before his death, Hu signed a labor contract with Shenzhen Shenhua Property Group Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Shenhua Property Company") and entered the University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital through labor dispatch to engage in cleaning work. After the incident, Hu's family sued Shenhua Property Company and the University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital for a total compensation of over 1.97 million yuan. The first instance court ordered Shenhua Property Company and the University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital to compensate 60000 yuan. Hu's family members are dissatisfied and have filed an appeal. The Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court held in the second instance that the falling accident did not occur during work, and its employer, Shenhua Property Company, does not bear any liability for infringement. The first instance determined that the compensation amount was 60000 yuan, which did not match the degree of fault of the hospital, and was corrected. It is worth noting that whether Hu committed suicide or died accidentally is the focal point of this case. In this regard, the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court held that the public security organs have not reached a conclusion on whether Hu's fall from the building was due to suicide, and there is no other evidence to prove that Hu's fall from the building was a suicide. Hu climbed the railing for various reasons, such as gaining a better view of the scenery, wanting to sit on the flat top of the railing, or picking up things. The reason for climbing is not proportional to the risk of falling, reflecting Hu's own fault for falling, rather than evidence of Hu's suicide. Therefore, the evidence in this case is insufficient to determine that Hu's fall from the building was a suicide, and it should be determined to be an accidental accident. The cleaner fell from the rooftop of the 7th floor of the hospital and died. Hu was born in 1967 and is from Shangcai County, Henan Province. Hu's daughter Dong Qian (pseudonym) told reporters that their family is from a rural area and their financial situation is relatively difficult. In the early years, her father and mother worked on construction sites. Later, as they grew older and couldn't do heavy physical labor, they worked together as cleaners. Her parents relied on their diligence to support the entire family, allowing her and her younger brother to attend university. In 2017, Hu and her husband entered the University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital as cleaners through labor dispatch. Later, due to family matters, the two of them went back to their hometown together for two years. In May 2019, the two of them once again entered the Shenzhen Hospital of the University of Hong Kong to work as cleaners. According to Dong Qian, Hu and her husband signed a contract with Shenhua Property Company once a year, with a basic salary of over 2000 yuan per month. If they work overtime, they can earn over 4000 yuan. At around 19:00 on November 2, 2022, Hu fell from the 7th floor rooftop of Building B in the hospital's inpatient department and died while working. The on-site inspection record shows that there is a wall around the rooftop, and there are two steps at the southwest corner of the rooftop. The first step is 43 centimeters high and the second step is 27 centimeters high. There is a mobile phone placed on the south side of the second step; The second step is 78.5 centimeters away from the top of the fence, and the fence is 40 centimeters wide. There are rubbing marks on the fence above the step, and there is a platform below the outer side of the fence, which is 100 centimeters wide; There is no relevant safety warning for the falling point. Afterwards, the police conducted an investigation and determined that Hu died from multiple organ injuries caused by falling from a height, which is not a criminal case. Dong Qian stated that before the incident, her mother had no abnormalities and did not leave any information. Due to the lack of a resting place for the cleaning staff in the hospital, my mother had to rest on the hospital rooftop. She had previously sent photos taken on the hospital rooftop to her relatives. Therefore, the family believes that due to the lack of a place to rest, Hu went to the rooftop to rest. The height of the rooftop guardrail was not enough, and an accident accidentally occurred. Pengpai News noticed that after the incident, there were reports on the internet that Hu suspected of having a conflict with his family and chose to commit suicide. In response to this, Dong Qian stated that this is a rumor. Prior to the incident, there were no arguments or conflicts between Hu and his family, and their conversations were normal. Moreover, after the incident, the police intervened in the investigation and asked many people. Relevant WeChat chat records can support this point. First instance: The labor company and hospital were ordered to compensate 60000 yuan. Dong Qian stated that after her mother's death, the University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital claimed that they were not responsible and only willing to compensate 20000 yuan for funeral expenses and provide 20000 yuan in relief for humanitarian reasons. Their family members believe that the hospital is at fault and needs to take responsibility, and cannot accept such a treatment plan. Later, Hu's family sued Shenhua Property Company and the University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital, claiming more than 1.97 million yuan in funeral expenses, death compensation, and emotional distress. According to the judgment, the main reason for Hu's family to claim compensation is that Hu was harshly criticized by the head nurse and the hospital did not provide a resting place for the cleaners, which led to Hu choosing to rest on the rooftop. However, the height of the guardrail on the rooftop was not high enough and did not meet the standards. In this regard, Shenhua Property Company believes that the rooftop involved in the case does not fall within the scope of labor services provided by Hu, and there is no causal relationship between Hu's falling from the building and his provision of labor services. The University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital stated that the location where Hu fell from the building is not a place for people to rest. There are rows of air conditioning units nearby, which emit a large amount of exhaust gas and heat when turned on, and are not suitable for people to rest. Moreover, the hospital's workplace has tea rooms, changing rooms, and a large number of seats in the corridors for anyone to rest. There is no situation where Hu has no place to rest and is forced to rest on the rooftop. The hospital also submitted a "Project Completion Acceptance Report", stating that the hospital's property has undergone completion acceptance and meets national standards, and there are no safety hazards. The Futian District Court in Shenzhen held in the first instance that there was no evidence in the case materials to show that the hospital had scolded or complained about Hu during his work beyond his job responsibilities, nor was there evidence to show that Hu had applied for a job transfer to the hospital. Hu's family did not submit sufficient evidence to prove that Hu fell from the building due to work reasons. The Futian District Court stated that in the absence of on-site surveillance videos and no recognition from the public security organs, based on existing evidence, there are two possibilities for Hu to fall from a building. One is suicide. If it is suicide, there is no evidence to prove that Shenhua Property Company and the University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital are at fault for this, and Shenhua Property Company and the University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital should not be held responsible; The second possibility is accidental falling from a building. The likelihood of Hu accidentally falling from a building is extremely low, but it cannot be completely ruled out. Based on the above analysis, the falling point involved in the case requires climbing over the fence platform and crossing over the platform below the fence to cause the fall. Hu should have foreseen the danger of the climbing behavior, and the corresponding consequences should mainly be borne by himself; The height of the fence at the point where Hu fell was 78.5 centimeters away from the walkable area, and the hospital did not post relevant safety warnings at this location, which was a certain fault. Considering the weak causal relationship between this fault and Hu's fall, the court has made a discretionary order for Shenhua Property Company and the University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital to compensate Hu's family with 60000 yuan. The second instance verdict has been revised to require the hospital to compensate Mr. Hu with 190000 yuan. Mr. Hu's family members are dissatisfied with the first instance verdict and choose to appeal. The judgment shows that in the second instance, Shenhua Property Company requested to reject the appeal and uphold the original judgment. The Shenzhen Hospital of the University of Hong Kong stated that although the hospital believes that the first instance judgment on the amount of compensation is inappropriate, it is willing to provide the appellant with this compensation based on respect for life and humanitarian principles, and requests the second instance court to reject all of the appellant's appeal requests. The Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court held that this case is a dispute over the right to life. The main focus of the second instance dispute is whether the accident occurred during work, whether the terrace railing meets safety standards, whether the Hong Kong University Shenzhen Hospital constitutes infringement, and whether the liability ratio determined in the first instance is appropriate. The Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court stated that although the falling accident occurred during working hours, it did not happen at the workplace. Hu's workplace was on the 6th floor of Building B in the hospital's inpatient department, where he was responsible for general indoor cleaning. The accident occurred on the 7th floor terrace, which was not Hu's workplace. The 6th floor general indoor cleaning that Hu was responsible for was also not related to the 7th floor terrace. Therefore, it can be determined that Hu's falling accident on the 7th floor terrace was not closely related to his work, and the falling accident did not occur during work. His employer, Shenhua Property Company, does not assume any tort liability. According to the Unified Standard for Civil Building Design, the height of the railing at the accident site does not meet the standard. Due to the fact that the railing involved in the case did not meet safety standards, personnel on the terrace were easily able to climb up to the top of the railing from that point, which also attracted terrace personnel to come to the point for aerial viewing or other activities. Therefore, it can be determined that the railing that did not meet safety standards is causally related to Hu's fall from the building. Therefore, it can be determined that the hospital's fault is causally related to Hu's death, and the hospital has committed infringement. Regarding the issue of responsibility allocation, the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court held that if Hu committed suicide, the hospital would not be held responsible. Human nature is to cherish life, so when a death event occurs, it should be presumed not to have been caused by suicide, unless there is evidence to the contrary. The public security organs in this case have not reached a conclusion on whether the fall was due to suicide, and there is no other evidence to prove that Hu's fall was a suicide. Hu climbed the railing for various reasons, such as gaining a better view of the scenery, wanting to sit on the flat top of the railing, or picking up things. The reason for climbing is not proportional to the risk of falling, reflecting Hu's own fault for falling, rather than evidence of Hu's suicide. Therefore, the evidence in this case is insufficient to determine that Hu's fall from the building was a suicide, and it should be determined to be an accident. Hu is an adult who knows the height of the 7th floor terrace where he is located and is aware of the danger of climbing. He is the last person to control the danger, but he chose to climb, so he is largely responsible for the occurrence of the fall. Compared to Hu's fault, the hospital's fault in causing the falling accident is relatively minor, accounting for about 10%. The first instance determined the compensation amount to be 60000 yuan, which does not match the degree of fault of the hospital and should be corrected. The court has decided that the University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital should compensate Mr. Hu's family with 190000 yuan. Dong Qian stated that the family is not very satisfied with the second instance verdict. They hope that through this case, the public can pay more attention to the protection of the basic rights of groups such as cleaners, and prevent similar tragedies from happening again. (New Society)