One case spans three to four years, tears flow from both eyes; sudden news of victory arrives, soothing the lawyer's toil—Wang Tengfeng

A case of Yan (deceased, age 11) who died from poisoning after eating moldy sugarcane, represented by Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm, was recently ruled by the Shenzhen Longgang District Court in the first instance, ordering the defendant to pay a total of 74 yuan in compensation including death damages, medical expenses, and solatium. Thus, the case that lasted three years has temporarily come to a close.

Child dies from poisoning; Zhiming lawyers uphold justice and rights

The client's young son Yan, on the evening of February 10, 2015, after eating sugarcane purchased from the defendant, experienced symptoms such as convulsions, blindness, and coma. During emergency rescue, his breathing and pulse stopped. He was later transferred to Shenzhen Children's Hospital for intensive care, and after two months, on April 19, 2015, died despite medical treatment. After the incident, multiple media outlets in Shenzhen reported on the event, sparking widespread social and public concern. Suffering the immense physical and emotional blow of losing their child, Yan's parents sought legal help from Zhiming Law Firm, deciding to take up legal weapons to defend their rights and seek justice for their unfortunate child.

　　Test report released; our client deeply disadvantaged

After Yan's poisoning incident, the Shenzhen Market and Quality Supervision and Management Committee Longgang Supervision Bureau intervened, and city and district disease control departments conducted investigations. From February 15 to February 17, 2015, the city and district disease control departments successively issued multiple reports including inspection reports, investigation reports, follow-up investigation reports, and research meeting minutes, showing that laboratory tests did not detect 3-nitropropionic acid in the sugarcane, so there was insufficient evidence to link Yan's poisoning symptoms to moldy sugarcane. This undoubtedly brought strong negative impact and resistance to our client's rights protection.

Administrative relief rejected; rights protection path faces further obstacles

Faced with an investigation conclusion that severely contradicted the facts, Yan's parents felt even more pained and helpless, embarking on a long journey to seek justice, hoping the relevant authorities would "revoke the investigation report and conduct a new test" to restore fairness. During this period, lawyers from our firm represented them through petitioning and administrative litigation relief procedures. First, the petition department rejected the application on the grounds that "the application lacks legal basis and the matter does not fall within the purview of the health and family planning department." Subsequently, we filed an administrative lawsuit, but the court dismissed our claim and requests, citing reasons such as failure to meet the conditions for filing and that the court had lawfully fulfilled its duties in terms of subject, procedure, content, and form. Thus, the door to seeking relief for our strong objections to the investigation and test reports was blocked.

Facing immense pressure and obstacles, the art of litigation ultimately led to a victory.

After encountering setbacks in various administrative relief efforts, lawyers from our firm filed a lawsuit over the right to life with the Longgang District Court in April 2015. The court trial focused on two key issues: whether the sugarcane sold by the defendant was moldy and whether there was a causal link between the victim's death and the consumption of sugarcane. Due to the disease control department's investigation report not confirming a causal relationship between the moldy sugarcane and the victim's death, and the administrative lawsuit's conclusion that the government regulatory authorities had lawfully performed their duties, coupled with multiple forensic institutions refusing to conduct appraisals during the litigation, the civil case became increasingly complex. The difficulty and adverse impact of representing the case were immense. However, through meticulous examination of evidence by Zhiming lawyers, especially retrieving a video recording from the chaotic evidence showing the vendor cutting off the red-spotted part of the sugarcane and replacing it with a spotless piece for Yan's mother, and presenting it in court, along with a comprehensive explanation of the facts based on emotion, reason, and law during the trial, the court determined that the evidence chain for a causal link between the victim's death and the consumption of moldy sugarcane was sufficient. The court found that the disease control department's "laboratory conclusion" that "there is insufficient evidence to prove a causal relationship between Yan's poisoning symptoms and the moldy sugarcane" was limited, and should be based on "epidemiological investigation data, the patient's incubation period, and specific poisoning manifestations." Therefore, the "test report, investigation report, and meeting minutes should not serve as the basis for the verdict in this case." Consequently, the court ruled that the evidence met the high probability standard of proof in civil litigation and issued a judgment supporting our claims, ordering the defendant to bear compensation liability. Thus, the three-year-long case was temporarily resolved with a victory. Zhiming lawyers, with their superb litigation skills, unwavering belief in justice, and professional ethics, comforted Yan's parents and honored the young life that was lost!