Should Shenzhen delivery riders who fought fires twice bear responsibility? Lawyer interprets the legal boundaries of righteous acts and damage compensation.
On August 1, 2026, Shenzhen News Network reported the heroic deeds of Ning Haijie, a retired firefighter
Legal Characterization of Righteous Acts: From Moral Obligation to Statutory Exemption from Liability
Ning Haijie's actions legally constitute a typical act of righteous assistance (见义勇为), meaning a natural person who is not under a statutory or contractual obligation steps forward to render aid in order to protect national or collective interests or the personal or property safety of others. Article 183 of China's Civil Code stipulates: "Where a person is harmed while protecting the civil rights and interests of others, the tortfeasor shall bear the civil liability, and the beneficiary may give appropriate compensation. If there is no tortfeasor, the tortfeasor has fled, or is unable to bear civil liability, and the victim requests compensation, the beneficiary shall give appropriate compensation." Article 184 further clarifies: "Where a person voluntarily renders emergency assistance and causes damage to the person being assisted, the rescuer shall not bear civil liability."
These two clauses, known in academia as "Good Samaritan clauses," are designed to relieve rescuers of worries. Ning Haijie, as a retired firefighter, possesses professional skills, yet his rescue actions were still voluntary and not a legally mandated obligation. On both occasions when he fought fires, he faced emergency situations with extremely limited time for judgment. Even if he made mistakes during professional operations, as long as they were not intentional or due to gross negligence, he would be exempt from liability for compensation to the person assisted.
It is worth noting that immunity from liability is not absolute. If the rescue involves obvious gross negligence—such as deliberate delay or reckless operations that worsen the damage—the rescuer may still bear corresponding responsibility. However, in judicial practice, courts generally take a lenient stance toward rescuers to encourage positive social behavior.
Judicial Practice of Damage Caused by Emergency Rescue: Centered on Article 184 of the Civil Code
The application of Article 184 of the Civil Code has formed a relatively uniform standard in judicial practice. In 2021, in a case in Guangzhou, a citizen named Li administered CPR to an unconscious elderly person while providing assistance, causing rib fractures, and the family filed a lawsuit claiming damages. The court ultimately dismissed the claim based on Article 184, determining that Li's conduct constituted voluntary emergency assistance and that there was no evidence proving gross negligence on his part, and therefore he bore no civil liability.
This case is highly similar to the firefighting situation involving Ning Haijie. When Ning Haijie connected fire hoses at the fire scene and rushed into the house to check for hidden fire sources, if property damage occurred due to improper operation—such as the fire spreading or water damage being exacerbated—the law would grant him immunity as long as his actions conformed to reasonable judgment under emergency circumstances. However, it should be noted that if the rescuer forcibly intervenes when there is no imminent danger, or negligently violates basic fire safety regulations, he may be found to have been negligent.
Legal practice advice: When rescuing, one should act according to one's abilities, prioritize ensuring personal safety, and try to adopt standard procedures as much as possible. If one is injured as a result of the rescue, compensation may be claimed from the beneficiary in accordance with Article 183 of the Civil Code; if there is a tortfeasor (such as an arsonist), one has the right to claim compensation directly from the tortfeasor. Ning Haijie lost his mobile phone during the second fire rescue; if it cannot be recovered, it may be regarded as property damage caused by the rescue act, and he has the right to claim appropriate compensation from the beneficiary (such as the property management or the owner), although in practice such compensation is often based on voluntary agreement.
Legal Protection for Workers in New Employment Forms Such as Delivery Riders: Work Injury Insurance and Occupational Injury Insurance
Ning Haijie, as a food delivery rider, is a worker in a new form of employment. His act of firefighting occurred during work hours but was not part of his delivery duties. Should it be recognized as a work-related injury? Article 14 of the Regulations on Work-Related Injury Insurance stipulates that a work-related injury must be caused by an accident injury due to work-related reasons. Although Ning Haijie's rescue act was not directly part of his work content, it falls under the circumstance of "being injured in activities such as emergency rescue and disaster relief conducted to safeguard national interests or public interests." Pursuant to Article 15, Item 2, it may be deemed as a work-related injury.
As a pilot city for new employment forms, Shenzhen has promoted the participation of flexible workers such as food delivery riders in occupational injury protection. Since 2022, Shenzhen has piloted "occupational injury protection for workers in new employment forms," covering groups such as delivery riders and ride-hailing drivers. The fees are paid by platform companies, with no cost borne by individuals. If a rider is injured while fighting a fire during a delivery, they can apply for occupational injury confirmation and receive benefits such as medical expenses and disability allowances.
However, Ning Haijie was not injured; what he faced was property loss rather than personal injury, and occupational injury insurance does not cover property damage. Therefore, he can only seek compensation from the beneficiary through civil channels under Article 183 of the Civil Code. Lawyers advise that gig workers and other flexible employees should proactively understand their insurance coverage and, if necessary, purchase commercial accident insurance to cover property risks beyond occupational injury insurance.
How can ordinary people rescue others safely? Practical advice from lawyers
Ning Haijie's bravery is admirable, but ordinary people must balance legal and safety considerations when attempting rescue. First, assess the risks at the scene before acting and act within your capabilities. If you lack professional skills, call the police and professional rescue services immediately, and avoid reckless intervention that could harm yourself or others. Second, preserve evidence during the rescue, such as recording videos of the scene and keeping a timeline, to prepare for potential legal disputes. Third, if you are injured during the rescue, seek medical attention promptly and keep the receipts, while also contacting the beneficiary or the tortfeasor to claim compensation.
For business or venue managers, the law also imposes requirements. Article 1198 of the Civil Code stipulates that if operators or managers of business premises or public places fail to fulfill their safety guarantee obligations, causing harm to others, they shall bear tort liability. At the Huitai Building where Ning Haijie fought the fire, and at the second fire scene, if the property management failed to ensure that fire-fighting facilities were intact and evacuation routes were unobstructed, it may be held liable for fire losses. Lawyers remind that property management should regularly inspect fire-fighting equipment and organize emergency drills to reduce legal risks.
Finally, those who act bravely should understand that legal protection is not unconditional. If undue harm is caused through intentional acts or gross negligence, they still bear responsibility. However, as Ning Haijie put it, "When I see a problem, I cannot pretend not to notice it." This spirit deserves encouragement from society. The law and the insurance system should jointly provide a safety net for good deeds, so that those who act bravely can do so without worry.
Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm has long focused on livelihood legal affairs and can provide professional legal consultation to Good Samaritans and workers in new forms of employment, covering work injury determination, damage compensation, insurance claims, etc., to help safeguard legitimate rights and interests. If you or someone around you encounters legal confusion during a rescue, please feel free to contact our firm. We will use our professional strength to protect acts of kindness.
