This thing is like this. Hanling and Yang's fatal "encounter" originated from online shopping returns. According to reports, hanling wants to return goods after shopping on an online shopping platform, and applies according to the platform's return process. After the seller agrees to return the goods, the platform dispatches the returned pick-up business to Baishi Express through its own platform express software, and the courier Yang comes to pick up the goods.
It is reported that Yang was employed by Beijing Hengtong Shida Transportation Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Hengtong Shida") in 20 18, but the two parties did not sign a labor contract. Hengtong Shida is a franchise company of Baishi Express, which provides services in the name of Baishi Company, and is responsible for the express service from the North Fourth Ring Road to the North Fifth Ring Road in Beijing. Baishi Company collects the franchise fee.
Then, do the courier companies and online shopping platforms involved need to bear tort liability? Experts believe that Yang, the courier, committed intentional infringement during the execution of his work, which led to hanling's death. Yang, Best Express and the online shopping platform are jointly and severally liable to the compensation obligee for the losses such as death compensation, mental damage compensation and depreciation damage compensation of the haunted house.
The courier involved is indeed the courier of Baishi Express franchisee. After the incident, Baishi Express reported on the whole network, and conducted a personnel safety hazard investigation on the express joining sites in the region. In order to avoid the recurrence of similar incidents, Best Express will further strengthen the management of franchisees, open the public security system in time, and provide safe delivery services.