基本案情
Li Mou worked for a certain Construction Labor Service Co., Ltd. in Shanghai. While working, he was injured
when paint was injected into hinger and was subsequently sent to the hospital for treatment.
Subsequently, Li Mou and the said Construction Labor Service Co., Ltd. reached a "One-time Compensation
Agreement" with the follg terms: the company would pay Li Mou a one-time compensation of 60,000 yuan for
various work-related injury benefits; all disputes arising from the employment relationship were ed, the
work-related injury matter was concluded, and the rights and obligations of both parties were terminated, with
no further disputes or subsequent costs. After the agreement was signed, the said Constrabor Service Co., Ltd.
fulfilled the payment of 60,000 yuan to the plaintiff in accordance with the agreement.
Now, the plaintiff Li Mou has filed a uit with the court, claiming that he suffered personal injury while
providing labor for the defendant and that the defendant should bear corresponding liability. He requests a
judgment ordering the defendant to compensate for various loses totaling 205,943.80 yuan (including medical
expenses, hospitalization allowances, nutritional expenses, etc., minus the compensation amont of 60,000 yuan
already paid by the defendant).
The defendant, the said Construction Labor Service Co., Ltd., argues that both parties had long since reached
and fully performed the one-time compensatioreement, and the plaintiff's lawsuit constitutes a duplicate claim. The defendant requests the court to dismiss the case.
裁判结果
The court held that this case is a dispute over liability for damages suffered by a person providing labor. When
a person providing labor suffsonal injury while engaging in labor activities, the party accepting the labor shall
bear liability for compensation. The plaintiff was injured during the course of work, and it is reasonable that
the defendantar liability for compensation.
The focus of the dispute in this case is whether the plaintiff has the right to claim compensation from the
defendant again after signing the "One-time Compensation AgreemeIn this case, regarding the timing of the
agreement, the plaintiff's outpatient and inpatient treatments had all concluded prior to the signing, and he
had a clear understanding and estimation of his s and losses; regarding the process of concluding the
agreement, the defendant did not take advantage of its superior position, the plaintiff's lack of experience, or
lack of judgment to requer coerce the plaintiff to sign the agreement; regarding the content of the agreement,
both parties clearly stipulated matters such as the compensation amount, payment method, and legal
consequences, with no g that could cause ambiguity, and the plaintiff had no mistaken understanding of the
above content or his own injuries; regarding the consequences of concluding the agreement, in this litigation,
upon the plaintiff'sapplication, the court commissioned an appraisal agency to conduct an appraisal. Based on
the appraisal results, the court determined the plaintiff's losses to ,507.50 yuan. The compensation amount
agreed upon in the agreement was 60,000 yuan, so there was no objective imbalance of interests in the
amount negotiated in the ag
In summary, the compensation agreement does not involve significant misunderstanding, manifest unfairness
at the time of conclusion, or other revocable circumstances. Furthermore, the content of the agreement doeste
mandatory provisions of laws and regulations, making it genuine and valid, and binding on both parties. The
plaintiff's claim for the defendant to pay various compensations lacks factual andlegal basis, and is therefore
not supported. The defendant's voluntary compensation of 507.50 yuan to the plaintiff is not contrary to the
law, and the court granted the request.
法官说法
The core legal rationale of this judgment lies in the principle of "freedom of will" in civil law. This principle
requs the law to fully respect the right of civil subjects to determine their mutual rights and obligations
through free negotiation within the scope prescribed by law. The Plaintiff and the Defendant voluntarily
negotiated and s a "One-time Compensation Agreement" with clear content and complete clauses. This "black
and white" agreement is the result of mutual choice after consultation and a solidified manifestation of their
true intons. The law protects such consensus based on good faith, endowing it with binding force to maintain
the security of transactions and the stability of social relations.
Of course, the law does noely prohibit the revocation or modification of agreements, but it sets strict
conditions, acting as a "safety valve." According to relevant provisions of the Civil Code of the People'slic of
China, only when there are circumstances such as a material misunderstanding, gross unfairness, fraud by one
party, or coercion, does the aggrieved party have the right to requethe court or arbitration institution to
revoke the agreement. It is important to note that the party claiming the agreement is revocable bears a strict
burden of proof.
For workers, it is to exercise caution before signing such important agreements. First, try to negotiate only
after the injury has stabilized and you have a relatively clear estimate of your disability level and all potential
losSecond, read every clause of the agreement carefully, especially regarding compensation items, amounts,
payment methods, and key phrases such as "one-time settlement" and "no dispute," ensnderstanding of their
legal implications. Finally, if possible, consult a professional legal expert to avoid damage to your rights and
interests due to information asymmetry or misunderstanding.
For emplis necessary to legally safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of workers. When negotiating
compensation, the principle of good faith and fairness should be followed, and the compensation plan
provided should cover s reasonable losses.
This article is reprinted from the WeChat official account "Shandong High Court", and we express our gratitude!