-
Anonymous users2024-01-24But as far as the arm is red and swollen, whether you stay in the hospital or not will not give you lost work expenses. Because the court believes that you can go for observation and treatment without hospitalization, but you want to be hospitalized, which is not within the scope of the other party's damages. Therefore, the court will definitely not support it.
Because the court does not support your hospitalization, there will be no same fee and no nursing fee.
You also said that the other party spent more than 3,000, and you spent 89 hundred, how are the injuries of both sides. It will affect the mediation of the police station, and spending more money does not mean that the injury is serious.
What is the behavior of the other party, and the other party is illegally occupying public facilities. If the act is established, the crime is not established because the damage is not high enough and the harm is not great enough. But you can tell the police, and the police will definitely look like you.
You can empathize with the police and tell the police what it looks like when you are pulled out halfway through, and your pants and clothes are soiled with excrement. I want to go to the toilet, lock the door, and if I want to do laundry, I have to go to other people's public facilities to get water. We rent the same house and I also have the right to go to the toilet.
-
Anonymous users2024-01-23It's not good to deal with such a landlord.
The use of legal means is reasonable and lawful, and there is a law to follow. >>>More
As mentioned by the questioner, the infringer's conduct has involved Article 87 of the Property Law, which stipulates that "if the owner of the immovable property has to use its land for the purpose of passage, etc., the owner of the immovable property shall provide necessary convenience"; Article 89 stipulates that "the construction of buildings shall not violate the relevant national engineering construction standards and obstruct the ventilation, lighting and sunshine of adjacent buildings". >>>More
You are not legally responsible.
But there is a moral imperative. >>>More
This issue is undertaken by three parties, both students plus the school.
In terms of the property rights of this suite, if it is family property and belongs to parents and children, the person who is added does not legally belong to the ranks of family members has no share.