The plaintiff called the police at the first time.
The judgment has taken legal effect and the defendant has fulfilled it.
The polluter shall bear the burden of proof on the situation of not bearing or reducing the responsibility stipulated by the law and there is no causal relationship between his behavior and the damage.
Based on the above reasons, Li applied to the court to order the defendant to compensate for economic losses totaling more than 30000 yuan.
In this case, the construction unit failed to take effective prevention and control measures for the project noise, and could not prove that there was no causal relationship between the death of Broilers and their noise pollution, so it should bear the corresponding economic compensation liability.
The judge reminded Construction noise refers to the sound that interferes with the surrounding production and living environment during construction.
The defendant’s behavior caused environmental pollution and did not provide evidence to prove that there was no causal relationship between the result of noise pollution and it, so he should bear tort liability for noise pollution.
After the on-site inspection, the staff of the animal health supervision office also found no animal epidemic or suspected epidemic, and the handover form issued by the animal harmless treatment Co., Ltd.
it is difficult to prove that the death of chickens has a direct causal relationship with the construction.
During the construction of lufa case [2021] 407, the construction unit did not take effective isolation measures and maintain a certain construction distance.
If you encounter similar disputes unfortunately, you must keep the evidence of your damage at the first time, actively negotiate with the other party, and safeguard your legitimate rights and interests through legal means when necessary…
Therefore, it can be determined that the noise pollution was caused by the defendant’s behavior.
Brief case The plaintiff Li has a chicken farm in Yiyuan County and is engaged in the breeding of white feather broilers.
The court entrusted a professional appraisal institution to evaluate the value of the dead poultry in this case and determined the economic loss of the plaintiff.
According to the law, in the event of a dispute over environmental pollution, the polluter shall bear the burden of proof on the circumstances in which the liability is not borne or mitigated as stipulated by the law and the absence of a causal relationship between his behavior and the damage.
The noise generated caused stress reaction to other broilers, resulting in a large number of abnormal deaths.
Finally, the court ruled that the defendant should compensate the plaintiff Li for the economic loss of more than 28000 yuan.
The police records of the public security Bureau stated that the defendant set off firecrackers and the sound of engineering machinery was too loud, resulting in the plaintiff’s chicken being scared to death.
Referee result After hearing, the court held that the defendant did not take measures against noise pollution during construction, set off firecrackers near the plaintiff’s chicken shed and accompanied by large-scale mechanical noise, and the broilers raised by the plaintiff died one after another.
Meanwhile, after the death of the broiler involved in the case, the plaintiff immediately informed the animal health supervision office and stated the possible causes of the death of the broiler.
According to China’s laws, the burden of proof in tort cases of disputes over environmental pollution is reversed.
Recently, Yiyuan County People’s Court concluded a dispute over noise pollution liability.
During the construction of the cemetery near the chicken farm in August 2018, the defendant’s construction unit set off firecrackers and accompanied by large mechanical noise, resulting in the death of the broiler raised by the plaintiff.
also stated that the cause of chicken death was caused by the defendant’s construction of a cemetery.
As farmers, they should set up obvious signs, do their reasonable duty of reminding, and take the initiative to take noise prevention measures to prevent losses.
The defendant believes that there are many causes of poultry death, such as hunger, plague, food poisoning, the shock of animals such as dogs raised by the plaintiff, etc.
In order to avoid the occurrence of such cases, the judge reminded that as a construction unit, it must pay attention to environmental impact assessment before construction, formulate reasonable and effective construction scheme, minimize the impact of the project on the surrounding environment and avoid damage to others caused by noise.
