Article 191
The statute of limitations for claims for damages for sexual assault suffered by minors is calculated from the date on which the victim reaches the age of 18.
I. Purpose of this Article
This article is a special provision on the rules for the commencement of the statute of limitations for the right to claim damages for sexual assault on minors.
II. Evolution of the Provisions
The original General Principles of the Civil Law did not make any special provisions on the rules for the commencement of the statute of limitations for the right to claim damages for sexual assault by minors. Article 191 of the original General Provisions of the Civil Law stipulates that: "The statute of limitations for the right to claim damages for sexual assault suffered by a minor shall be calculated from the date on which the victim reaches the age of 18. This provision remains unchanged in the Civil Code.
3. Interpretation of Provisions
This article regulates the statute of limitations for sexual assault of minors.
There are different opinions in the legislation on how to determine the limitation period for the right to claim damages for sexual assault of minors. The legislation affirms that the reason for the special provisions is that minors have been sexually assaulted, and since they are minors, if the general method of starting the statute of limitations is applied, their legitimate rights and interests will not be effectively protected, so there is a need for special provisions.
Liability for damages arising from sexual assault on minors arises: (1) causing personal injury to minors, infringing on the rights to health and body, and giving rise to liability for personal injuries;
When the right to claim damages for sexual assault on a minor arises, it is not based on the fact that the rights have been harmed, but from the date on which the minor knows or should have known that the rights have been damaged and the obligor, then the minor's rights will not be effectively protected because the minor does not yet have full capacity for civil conduct, so the statute of limitations period shall be calculated from the date on which the victim reaches the age of 18.
4. Cases
Yang, Lang, Chen, and other disputes over the right to life, right to health, and right to body
Facts: Plaintiff Yang alleged that after the first class of the final examination on the morning of January 26, 2015, defendant Xie introduced a girlfriend to defendant Lang and invited Zhang and Luo to have dinner and drink with defendants Lang and Chen. After the meal, defendant Xie persuaded me to go to defendant Chen's house to play, and at defendant Chen's house, I was forcibly sexually assaulted by Lang. The defendant Dianjiang County failed to fulfill its management duties, failed to provide me with safety guarantees, and had mismanagement, causing the defendants Lang and Chen to illegally break into the school, resulting in an accident, and the harm caused to me was particularly serious, so the lawsuit was brought to the people's court and the six defendants were requested to be compensated. One of the reasons for the defendant's argument was that the statute of limitations for bodily injury was one year, and the plaintiff's lawsuit had exceeded the statute of limitations, and requested the court to dismiss the plaintiff's claim. With regard to the defendant Dianjiang County's argument that the plaintiff's lawsuit had exceeded the statute of limitations, the court held that the plaintiff had been diagnosed with injuries by a hospital examination on June 24, 2015, and filed a lawsuit on February 26, 2016, and that the plaintiff had also suffered sexual assault on March 3, 2016, which was a continuous infringement, and the right was still within the protection period, so the plaintiff's lawsuit had not exceeded the statute of limitations, and the court did not accept the defense opinion of the defendant Dianjiang County school.
5. Analysis
The case involved the provisions of Article 191 of the Civil Code, which is a continuation of Article 191 of the General Provisions of the Civil Code. In this case, it goes without saying that the infringer Lang forcibly sexually assaulted the plaintiff, causing damage to the plaintiff's body, health and spirit, and should be liable for compensation. The issue at issue in this case was whether the plaintiff's claim had exceeded the statute of limitations. After hearing, the court held that the sexual assault suffered by the plaintiff was a continuous infringement, so the right was still within the protection period, so the plaintiff's lawsuit did not exceed the statute of limitations. Based on this, article 191 of the General Provisions of the Civil Law stipulates that the statute of limitations for the right to claim damages for sexual assault of minors shall be calculated from the date on which the victim reaches the age of 18. Article 191 of the Civil Code continued the relevant provisions, which was more conducive to the protection of minors' sexual autonomy, which was also one of the main highlights of the legislation of the General Provisions of the Civil Law at that time.