If drinking at a party leads to death, if there is no guiding behavior such as persuading others to drink, then you don't have to bear the responsibility, but if the hotel owner fails to fulfill the safety guarantee obligation, you need to bear the tort liability.

According to the Tort Liability Law of the People's Republic of China, the provisions are as follows:

1. Article 24 If neither the victim nor the actor is at fault for the occurrence of the damage, both parties may share the loss according to the actual situation.

2. article 37 managers of public places such as hotels, shopping malls, banks, stations and entertainment places or organizers of mass activities who fail to fulfill their security obligations and cause damage to others shall bear tort liability.

if the behavior of a third party causes damage to others, the third party shall bear the tort liability; If the manager or organizer fails to fulfill the obligation of safety guarantee, he shall bear corresponding supplementary responsibilities.

Extended information

1. Case

At the beginning of February, 2115, Cao was hired as the vice president of a hotel in Xiping County, Henan Province. On the evening of February 23rd, Cao called five colleagues, including Guo, to have dinner in another hotel in the county. During the dinner, six of them (three men and three women) * * * drank three and a half bottles of Niulanshan Erguotou liquor, while Cao drank more. After the dinner, Guo and others sent Cao back to a hotel in Xiping County and left. At noon the next day, Cao was found dead in the dormitory.

Autopsy showed that there was vomit in Cao's nasal cavity, and there was vomit attached to his neck clothes, but no obvious abnormality was found. Later, three people, including Zhou, a close relative of Cao, sued the Xiping County People's Court of Henan Province for violating the right to life, requesting that Guo and other five people be ordered to compensate for economic losses such as death compensation of 291,111 yuan.

2. Referee

The People's Court of Xiping County, Henan Province held that Guo and others, after drinking with Cao, sent Cao to the dormitory together, which had fulfilled the obligation of custody and care. Later, Cao died in the dormitory, and the plaintiff had no evidence to prove that it was caused by drinking. There was no causal relationship between his death and the five people who had a meal and drank with him. Therefore, the judgment rejected the plaintiff's application.

the plaintiff refused to accept the appeal and appealed to the Intermediate People's Court of Zhumadian City, Henan Province.

The second trial of Zhumadian Intermediate People's Court held that Cao drank too much on the evening of dinner, and died soon after, during which nothing else happened, so it should be considered that there was a causal relationship between his death and drinking. Guo and other five people think that Cao did not drink too much, and did not fulfill the corresponding duty of care and care after drinking, believing that there would be no problems and leaving, which led to Cao's final death, so he should bear certain compensation for the damage consequences of Cao;

Cao, as an adult, has gross negligence and should bear the main responsibility. It is decided that Cao is responsible for 81%, and Guo and other five people are responsible for 21%. Therefore, the judgment of the first instance was revoked, and the judgment was changed to "Guo and other five people compensated the plaintiff for 119,111 yuan, and Guo and other five people were jointly and severally liable for compensation".

After the judgment came into effect, Guo and other five people refused to accept it, and applied to the Higher People's Court of Henan Province for retrial on the grounds that "the duty of custody and care has been fulfilled, and there is no causal relationship between Cao's death and * * *'s eating and drinking together".

The Henan Higher People's Court considered that the original cause of Cao's death was drunkenness from the process of drinking too much at dinner, going to the rest place without escort, vomiting and suffocation. It is difficult to distinguish the role of Guo and others in drinking and persuading wine at dinner, and after sending Cao back to the hotel dormitory, they believed that there would be no problems, and did not take corresponding safety care measures for Cao, which caused Cao to be left unattended after drunkenness, leading to death consequences. Therefore, the reasons for Guo and others' complaints could not be established, so they ruled that they should be rejected.

China People's Congress Network-Tort Liability Law of the People's Republic of China

China Court Network-Those who fail to fulfill their duty of care due to drinking shall be jointly and severally liable.