|
In the case Du Junming, Zhao Xiuying v. Lianbin, Chen Qiaofen, 12the defendants were accused of infringing upon the plaintiffs’ right of privacy by illegally setting up a surveillance equipment in the wall of plaintiffs’ bedroom. The plaintiffs considered that the defendants’ unlawful act has injured seriously their personal right, personal dignity and right of privacy, and caused great suffering to their spirit. The plaintiffs claim defendants to offer of an apology openly and compensate their mental damage on an amount of 40,000 yuan (RMB, similarly hereinafter). The court, after ascertaining the fact of the case, holds that:
The defendants’ act of installing monitor equipment in plaintiffs’ residence is a direct and intentional tortious act that is implemented in a planned way, which has caused great pain and pressure on plaintiffs’ mind, and plaintiffs’ mental suffering resulting from the defendants’ act is visible and typical and shall be pacified and compensated.
The court supports the plaintiffs’ claims and decides defendants to apologize publicly and pay 40.000 yuan as pacified money to plaintiffs’ mental injury.
3. specific status right
In China’s current civil law system, the status rights are generated commonly from the marriage and family relations, such as conjugal relation, mutual relation of children and parents, etc. It contains particular personality and spiritual interests. Infringement upon status right also leads to non-property damage, which, in justice practice, occurs typically and generally under the situation when the guardianship being injured. Grievous injury to such relations as parents and children or between close relatives, for instance, illegally separating the ward from guardianship, may be recognized as infringement upon guardianship and is considered as a kind of mental injury. If the guardian files a claim for compensation of mental injury, the court shall accept it subject to “interpretation”.
In the case Wang Hongjun, Lan Rongling v. Changzhou Center Hospital, Hebei Province, 13 the plaintiffs chanced to find their five years old son has no consanguinity with them, which was affirmed by the paternity test afterwards. A suit was brought to the court by plaintiffs who held that the direct cause to this aftermath is the nursing staff of defendant, the Changzhou center hospital, gave the wrong baby to plaintiffs during the mother was in hospital after her childbearing. The plaintiffs claimed the defendant to look back for their own son, compensate support payments spent on wrong child on an amount of 25,200 yuan and 1 million yuan on spiritual injury payments. The court, after finding the case, holds that:
Owing to the negligence of defendant the plaintiffs unable to foster their own child, which has caused great mental suffering to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs shall have the right to claim for payments on mental injury and necessary expenses the plaintiffs spent on fostering the wrong child.
The court of first instance gave a judgement that the defendant shall compensate plaintiffs the compensatory payments of nurture 60,000 yuan, spiritual injury payment 60,000 yuan.
In addition, there is a new development in the field of judicial protection to the moral rights by extending the protective scope from right of personality to some specified status rights involving particular personality right and spiritual right. In article 46 of the amended Marriage Law adopted in 2001 it states:
Where one of the following circumstances leads to divorce the unerring party shall have the right to claim compensation:
(1). bigamy is committed;
(2). one party who has a spouse cohabits with another person of the opposite sex;
(3). family violence is committed; or
(4). a family member is maltreated or abandoned. 14
|
