On April 30th, 20021year, Wang, a take-away food delivery clerk of a catering company, went out on a motorcycle and opened the mobile phone software to accept the food delivery order as usual, only to be injured when he collided with a motor vehicle during driving. Upon Wang's application, the Municipal Human Resources and Social Security Bureau identified Wang as a work-related injury. However, a catering company refused to accept it and applied for administrative reconsideration. The reconsideration result is to maintain the original work-related injury identification. The catering company still refuses to accept the administrative reconsideration decision and brings an administrative lawsuit.
After trial, the court held that according to the Regulations on Work Injury Insurance and other relevant regulations, Wang entered the working state when he started to access the company system at any time, that is, whether the employer sent a bill did not affect Wang's working hours. Start; Wang's injury location is within the scope of the pick-up and drop-off list, which conforms to the work practice, and his injury location belongs to the work area. Wang was injured during working hours and workplace due to work reasons, which met the conditions for work-related injuries. The court ruled that the lawsuit of a catering company was rejected according to law. The second instance upheld the original judgment.
Lawyer Shen Chuxiong believes that the identification of work-related injuries in China is based on the comprehensive identification of factors such as "working hours, working places and working reasons" stipulated in the Regulations on Work-related Injury Insurance, and it is a presumption in legal nature. The particularity of presumption lies in that it is not simply based on empirical rules, and the fact that "the accident was caused by work" is deduced from the basic facts such as "working time, working place and working reason", but is integrated into the special fact proving process of value judgment in substantive laws such as protecting workers. In this case, in view of the dispute over the identification of work-related injuries of take-away food delivery personnel on the Internet platform, the court grasped the above-mentioned particularity of China's work-related injury identification and integrated the estimation procedure with the value judgment of protecting workers' rights and interests, which not only made a judgment in line with the concept of social justice, but also formulated new presumption rules for new types of work-related injury identification cases, which has positive typical significance.