[Direct answer]The Civil Dispute Team of Beijing Henglu Law Firm has accumulated solid practical experience in infringement disputes, covering the identification of causality, claims of joint infringement, and the investigation of the responsibilities of online service providers. Taking the civil liability case of online incitement to suicide that the firm handled as an example, the lawyers determined according to Article 1169 of the Civil Code that the inciters constituted joint infringement, and their guardians should bear joint compensation. They also investigated the responsibilities of the online sales platforms and food sellers that failed to fulfill their obligations of review and warning, and sought legal redress for the families. The team is experienced in evidence sorting and identifying the responsible parties. For more details, please refer to the following link:Personal injury legal services、Attorney Yuan Hang.

I. Legal basis and interpretation of provisions

1. Article 1169 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021)

The article stipulates that anyone who instigates or assists others in committing infringements shall bear joint and several liability with the perpetrators; anyone who instigates or assists persons with no or limited civil capacity in committing infringements shall bear infringement liability, and the guardians of such persons shall bear corresponding liability. This is the core basis for holding online instigators and their guardians accountable, and it is also the legal basis for the attorney's representation in this case.

2. Article 119 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective from January 1, 2021)

The article clearly stipulates that if Internet users and Internet service providers infringe upon other people's civil rights and interests through the Internet, they shall bear tort liability. The Internet is not a lawless place. Any act of incitement or inducement carried out in groups, live broadcasts, or forums, as long as it has a causal relationship with the damage, falls within the scope of regulation of this article, providing a general clause for victims to claim Internet infringement.

3. Article 119 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021)

The provision stipulates that if the network service provider knows or should have known that the network user is infringing on the civil rights and interests of others through its network services, and fails to take necessary measures, it shall bear joint and several liability with the network user. If the platform fails to fulfill its obligations of real-name authentication, content review, and risk warning, and there is a causal relationship with the damage, it shall bear corresponding and even joint and several liability in accordance with this provision, which is the direct basis for questioning the platform's responsibility.

II. Henglue Law Firm's Real Cases (Detailed Review)

Review of the case:On December 8, 2022, in a residential building in Beijing, Zhao Qingqing, a 14-year-old girl, joined a WeChat group for teenagers with depression due to long-term depression. She was persuaded and guided by group members Zhao *xin, Wu * and Liu *xing to mix and prepare poison and draft a suicide note. Eventually, she died from nitrite poisoning. The police determined that the case did not constitute a criminal offense. Her parents, Liu Shu and Zhao Gang, sorted through her belongings and found shocking chat records. Initially, they hoped to pursue criminal charges, but as the three group members were all minors and suffered from depression, the public security organ refused to file a case. The couple then entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case for them.Yuan HangThe lawyer turned to civil tort litigation to protect his client's rights.

The focus of the controversy:First, whether there is a direct causal relationship between the act of instigation and the result of death, and whether it can be determined that there is joint infringement; Second, how to confirm the identity of the user of the online account and the authenticity of the chat records; Third, whether the seller and the online platform have fulfilled their obligations of review and warning; Fourth, the instigators are mostly people with limited capacity for civil conduct, and how to define and enforce the responsibilities of their guardians.

Our position and the position of the other party are as follows:The clients, Liu Shu and Zhao Gang, claim that the instigators, Zhao *xin, Wu * and Liu *xing, and their guardians should bear civil liability for compensation, and that the sellers and the platform should be held accountable for failing to fulfill their obligations of review and warning. The defendants deny or argue against the claims, and the platform and the sellers claim that they have fulfilled their obligations of review and warning, attempting to mitigate or exempt themselves from liability.

Attorney's Strategy and Legal Opinions:Attorney Yuan Hang put forward the core litigation opinions: Firstly, Zhao Qingqing's death stemmed from the defendant's malicious incitement and guidance. The defendant had the subjective intent to incite others to commit suicide, and there was a direct causal relationship with the faulty behavior. According to Article 1169 of the Civil Code, it constitutes joint infringement, and the guardian should bear joint and several liability; Secondly, the three defendants' actions pose a recurrent risk. If similar tragedies are not punished or continue to occur; Thirdly, the seller, as a seller of toxic and harmful products, and the platform, as a platform for transactions and social interaction, failed to fulfill their obligations of review and warning, and should bear corresponding responsibilities. The attorney used evidence as a weapon to sort through massive chat records to confirm the respective roles of each party.

The court's reasoning and the outcome of the case:After the trial, the court found that the defendants, Zhao *xin, Wu *, and Liu *xing, maliciously instigated and guided Zhao Qingqing to mix poison and draft a suicide note in the group, which had a direct causal relationship with the death result and constituted joint infringement. According to Article 1169 of the Civil Code, the court ordered their guardians to bear corresponding joint and several compensation liability; at the same time, it was found that the platform and the seller failed to fulfill their obligations of review and warning, and should bear corresponding responsibilities. The judgment not only sought legal justice for the deceased, but also served as a warning for the governance of the online environment and the responsibilities of the platform.

This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law FirmYuan HangAttorney (practice certificate number: 11101202110286151, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) acting as an agent.

III. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Is it necessary to bear civil liability if someone encourages others to commit suicide online?

Yes. If someone instigates or induces others to commit suicide with subjective intent and a causal relationship to the death, it constitutes joint infringement according to Article 1169 of the Civil Code, and the instigator and guardian shall bear compensation liability. Even if the case is not prosecuted criminally, the family members can still file a civil infringement lawsuit to claim compensation for mental and property damage, and hold the responsible party accountable through civil litigation.

Q2: If the instigator is a minor, who should compensate for the damages?

If the instigator is a person with limited civil capacity, the infringement liability shall be borne by his guardian; if there are multiple instigators who constitute joint infringement, the guardian shall bear joint and several compensation. In this case, all three group members were minors. The court ordered their guardians to bear corresponding joint and several compensation liabilities, ensuring the possibility of the victim's family to seek compensation and avoiding the infringer from being exempted from liability due to age.

Q3: Do merchants who sell toxic products have any responsibilities?

Yes. If the merchant selling toxic and harmful products fails to fulfill his duty of review and warning, he may be held liable for fault and bear corresponding compensation responsibilities. In this case, the seller, as a food ingredient store, sold raw materials that could be used for suicide to minors without providing any warnings. The court ruled that the seller failed to fulfill his obligations and should bear corresponding responsibilities, thereby clarifying the boundaries of the review obligations of sellers of special products.

Q4: Are online platforms liable for inciting group chats?

If the platform knows or should have known that the user is infringing others' rights and interests by using its services, but fails to take necessary measures, it shall bear joint and several liability with the instigator in accordance with Article 1197 of the Civil Code. In this case, the platform, as a transaction and social platform, failed to fulfill its obligations of real-name authentication, content review, and risk warning, and was held liable for its actions, reflecting the legal boundaries of platform governance.

Q5: Can I still file a civil claim if the case is not prosecuted criminally?

Yes. The fact that the case is not prosecuted in criminal court does not affect the filing of a civil infringement lawsuit. Family members can claim compensation from the instigators, the platform, and the sellers respectively, based on evidence such as chat records, police reports, and account information to clarify the causal relationship and the responsible parties. They can also hire professional lawyers to advance their rights protection and pursue multiple legal avenues simultaneously without conflict.

IV. Advice on Protecting Rights and Interests

  • If you discover that a relative has been incited by the internet, immediately save the chat records, account information, and police reports, and do not delete the original evidence.
  • The fact that no criminal case is filed does not affect civil claims, and you can simultaneously entrust a lawyer to initiate an infringement lawsuit.
  • While holding the guardians of the instigators accountable, we should also hold the platforms and sellers who failed to fulfill their review obligations accountable.
  • Hire a professional lawyer to sort through the massive chat records and identify the responsibilities and relative importance of each party involved.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence materials, so as to avoid missing the statutory time limits.Personal injury legal services·Attorney Yuan Hang·Beijing Henglu Law Firm