1. The food allowance for hospitalization can be determined by referring to the standard of food allowance for ordinary staff of local state organs.

it is really necessary for the victim to go to other places for treatment, but he can't be hospitalized due to objective reasons. The reasonable part of the accommodation and meals actually incurred by the victim and his accompanying staff should be compensated.

2. The nutrition fee is determined according to the disability of the victim and the opinions of medical institutions.

The specific contents are as follows:

Article 23 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Laws in the Trial of Personal Injury Compensation Cases stipulates that the food allowance for hospitalization can be determined with reference to the standard of food allowance for ordinary staff of local state organs. It is really necessary for the victim to go to other places for treatment, and he can't be hospitalized for objective reasons. The reasonable part of the accommodation and meals actually incurred by the victim and his accompanying staff should be compensated. Article 24 stipulates that the nutrition fee shall be determined according to the disability of the victim with reference to the opinions of medical institutions.

Hospitalization food subsidy is a certain subsidy for the food expenses of the victims during hospitalization. For the hospital food subsidy, the first thing to be solved is the subsidy standard. Article 23 of the Interpretation stipulates that "it shall be determined by referring to the standard of food subsidy for ordinary staff of local state organs". The so-called local is generally the city-level unit where the hospital is located. The second is the compensation period, which should be the victim's hospitalization period. Regarding the scope of compensation, the Interpretation stipulates that if it is really necessary to go to other places for treatment, and the victim cannot be hospitalized, the reasonable part of the accommodation and food expenses actually incurred by the victim and his accompanying staff should be compensated. There is no dispute about this provision for the two types of personnel, but what does the "reasonable part" in the Interpretation mean? According to the legislative idea, it means to live in a guest house and eat a canteen instead of a star-rated hotel or a high-end hotel.

among several compensation items, the nutrition fee is the most flexible. Article 24 of the Interpretation contains only 22 words: "Nutrition expense is determined according to the victim's disability with reference to the opinions of medical institutions", which can be described as simple and clear, but there are many problems behind it, mainly the form and effectiveness of evidence.

First of all, "determined by referring to the opinions of medical institutions" can be regarded as the right entrusted or given to the hospital by law. When the victim claims, he needs to obtain the nutrition or prescription certificate from the hospital. The key is what kind of qualified medical personnel have issued this nutrition certificate or prescription. What kind of evidence these proofs and prescriptions belong to in civil litigation, and how to cross-examine and accept them are all discretionary for the judges of the court of appeal. Secondly, what is nutrition, whether it is meat, poultry, eggs, seafood, ginseng, health food or tonic. As we all know, different diseases have different requirements for food, even if the same food is cooked in different ways, its nutrition is quite different. Whether the nutrition certificate and prescription issued by the hospital are within its authority or service scope, judging from the service contract relationship between doctors and patients, their opinions are likely to be accompanied by tendentiousness. In litigation, how can the nutrition certificate or prescription prove the "three characteristics" of its evidence in the cross-examination of litigation? How should the collegial panel handle it when one party raises an objection? If the hospital refuses to issue opinions on nutrition fees on the grounds that there is no legal basis or the hospital has no regulations, what should the judge take as a "reference"? Article 24 of the Interpretation clearly gives hospitals and judges complete discretion.

There should be two necessary evidences for determining the nutrition fee: 1. The opinions of medical institutions as a reference are the prerequisite stipulated in the Interpretation, and the nutrition opinions of medical institutions should be based on the needs of adjuvant treatment. For individual cases, if the medical institutions do not issue nutrition opinions, it can be presumed that nutrition does not need adjuvant treatment, and no compensation should be made for the nutrition fee. 2, the nutritional grade and the corresponding relationship standard of injury. Of course, it is unrealistic to pursue nutrition for people who have to cope with the urgent need of daily food and clothing. In today's daily life, under the premise that people pay attention to the quality of life and widely pay attention to the supplement of nutrition, the nutritional products corresponding to the nutritional expenses of the injured are obviously not necessary for daily life. Therefore, there should be a scope and grade for the nutritional products that need to pay the nutritional expenses, which is not only a trial, but also a rule to follow even if the parties mediate.

traffic accident death compensation: /special/jtsgpcswbz/