Su Xqin v. Yang Xqing Dispute over Compensation for Property Damage

Keywords: Property damage compensation dispute; lease relationship; appraisal; fire; allocation of liability for the accident

Handling Attorney: Hu Xlei

Basic Facts of the Case: The plaintiff alleges that on June 20, 2017, the plaintiff and the defendant entered into a “Greenhouse Lease Agreement,” under which the plaintiff agreed to lease two greenhouses located in Bayi Town, Sujiatun District, Shenyang City, to the defendant for a term from June 29, 2017, to June 29, 2020. The plaintiff was responsible for providing ancillary facilities such as a caretaker’s house, the rear wall of the greenhouses, steel-frame scaffolding, rolling shutter motors, a well, and a water pump; all other production equipment was to be provided by the defendant. During the term of the contract, if the defendant caused damage to the facilities invested in by the plaintiff—including damage resulting from natural disasters such as fire—the defendant would bear full responsibility. On April 9, 2021, while the defendant was using the greenhouses, a fire broke out in one of them. The plaintiff claims that the fire completely destroyed the two northernmost greenhouses, rendering them unusable and causing the plaintiff economic losses totaling 225,000 yuan. The Sujiatun District Fire Rescue Brigade issued a fire accident identification report confirming that the fire was caused by an electrical fault. The defendant contends that during the time of the fire, it had not been using any electrical equipment, and that the fire was instead triggered by the aging of existing electrical wiring inside the greenhouses—thus, the fire was unrelated to the defendant. The defendant had leased the greenhouses primarily for storing construction equipment, materials, and spare parts; as a result of the fire, all items stored by the defendant were completely destroyed, causing direct losses amounting to 250,000 yuan. In this case, the lawyer handling the matter represents the defendant.

Case Highlights: In this case, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit twice. The first lawsuit was filed in May 2021. During the litigation, at the advice of the lawyer handling the case, the defendant filed a counterclaim. After visiting the fire scene, the lawyer gained an understanding of the general structure of the greenhouse that had caught fire and the approximate location of the ignition point. The lawyer took photographs and videos, and later drew detailed site diagrams to help the court better grasp the situation at the scene. Meanwhile, since the fire accident report merely stated: “The fire originated in the eastern area of the northernmost greenhouse belonging to Su Fengqin; the ignition point was approximately 27 meters from the east wall on the north side of the greenhouse, and the cause of the fire was an electrical fault within the greenhouse,” it failed to specify the exact equipment involved or whether the fire was indeed caused by the defendant’s improper use of electricity. To clarify the facts of the case, the lawyer obtained the fire scene inspection records from the Sujiatun Fire Brigade. According to these records: “Within the 25- to 29-meter range, the lower part of the steel reinforcement framework at the top showed more severe oxidation than the upper part. Several melted aluminum wires were found near the north wall, but no other ignition sources or energized equipment were detected.” These inspection records were rather favorable to the defendant. During the proceedings, the court commissioned appraisal institutions three times to assess the losses suffered by both the plaintiff and the defendant. However, all three attempts ended with the appraisal institutions returning the cases, citing their inability to conduct the appraisal. As the year-end approached, the plaintiff withdrew its original lawsuit, and we, in turn, withdrew our counterclaim. After the first lawsuit was concluded, the client asked the lawyer handling the case whether it would be possible to remove the burned equipment from the greenhouse to prevent further occupation of the plaintiff’s greenhouse and avoid rental losses. After being warned about the associated risks, the client proceeded to remove and clear out the damaged equipment. At the beginning of 2022, the plaintiff filed another lawsuit. During the court hearing, the lawyer informed the presiding judge about the three previous instances when the court had commissioned appraisals only to have them returned each time. The lawyer also submitted as evidence the obtained fire scene inspection records and WeChat chat logs showing that the defendant had previously requested the plaintiff to replace the aging electrical wiring. Ultimately, the court held that, based on the fire accident report and the on-site inspection records, it could not be determined that the fire in the plaintiff’s greenhouse was caused by the defendant’s improper use of electrical equipment within the greenhouse. Therefore, the court dismissed the plaintiff’s claim. The second-instance court upheld the original judgment.

Typical significance: Although the case itself is not major, it is fairly typical. As landlords are typically farmers who are relatively disadvantaged, judges usually afford them appropriate consideration. In cases where an expert appraisal is unavailable, the judge may arbitrarily determine the amount of loss and order the defendant to bear partial compensation liability—especially in cases like this one, where the determination of liability is not entirely clear. In this case, we took the evidence we had obtained as our breakthrough point, and combined it with on-site demonstration photos to help the judge understand that the cause of the fire was the aging of the electrical wiring. At the same time, by presenting photographs of the damage at the scene, we enabled the judge to recognize that our actual losses were far greater. Under these circumstances, ordering us to bear the full brunt of the losses would clearly be unfair. It’s crucial to grasp the judge’s mindset when handling the case.