"Stay-at-home mother" sued for divorce and was compensated 50,000 housework expenses

Recently, the High People's Court of Guangdong Province released a typical case on safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of women.

The content of the case involves hot issues such as women's privacy rights, reputation rights, protection of labor rights and interests during childbirth, anti-domestic violence and personal safety protection orders, and the ownership of bride price, which reflects the active exploration and beneficial practice of Guangdong courts in doing justice for the people, resolving people's household affairs with affection, and safeguarding women's legitimate rights and interests.

In 2023, the provincial courts concluded 81,740 first-instance cases of family disputes, of which 42,580 were withdrawn through mediation, a year-on-year increase of 23.1%, 26,000 family disputes were successfully resolved before litigation, a year-on-year increase of 11.17%, 584 personal safety protection orders were issued, and relevant departments were jointly promoted to implement personal safety protection orders, and a dense anti-domestic violence protection network was jointly woven.

Typical case 1

Should the compensation for housework be paid?

Li (female) and Xu registered their marriage in 2016 and had a son after marriage. In 2022, Li sued for divorce on the grounds of the breakdown of the relationship between the husband and wife, and claimed that the legitimate child should be directly raised by him, and Xu would pay child support and pay him 50,000 yuan in housework compensation.

Xu agreed to the divorce, but claimed that his son was directly raised by him, and did not agree to pay compensation for housework.

The effective judgment of the Guangzhou Huadu District People's Court held that the two parties did not pay attention to the cultivation of feelings after marriage, and the rift in the relationship between the husband and wife could not be repaired, and both parties agreed to divorce, and the divorce was allowed in accordance with the law.

Xu worked outside all the year round, and during this period, taking care of his son and handling family affairs were handled by Li, and the sons of both parties were still young and needed to pay more painstaking care, and Li took on more responsibilities and obligations for raising children and taking care of the family, and his hard work for the family should be recognized.

According to Article 1088 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, combined with the evidence in the case, the judgment allowed the divorce of the two parties, the legitimate child was directly raised by Li, and Xu paid child support and paid 50,000 yuan in housework compensation to Li.

Typical significance

Affirm the independent value of housework

The Guangzhou Huadu District People's Court said that although housework is unpaid, it is of great significance to family life and social production, and the contribution and contribution of "stay-at-home mothers" cannot be ignored.

This case accurately applies the provisions of the Civil Code on economic compensation for housework, and fully affirms the independent value of housework by giving economic compensation at the time of divorce, which is conducive to educating and guiding the husband and wife to consciously assume family responsibilities, respect and support each other, and is of positive significance for protecting the legitimate rights and interests of women, maintaining family harmony and stability, and promoting good family customs in the new era.

Typical case 2

After less than half a year of marriage, the man asks the woman to return the bride price

Mainland resident Chen and Macao resident Zhang (female) met on a blind date in November 2021 and got married in February 2022.

In June 2022, Chen sued the court for a divorce and Zhang to return the bride price of 40,000 yuan and the jade bracelet due to a dispute with Zhang.

Zhang agreed to the divorce and the return of the jade bracelet, but argued that the bride price had been used for living expenses and to pay the mortgage loan for the property purchased by Chen before marriage. Chen confirmed that the rent and living expenses of both parties during their stay in Macao were paid by Zhang.

The effective judgment of the Zhuhai Intermediate People's Court held that Zhang was a resident of Macao, and the case was a divorce dispute involving Macao.

According to the provisions on the application of the law of foreign-related civil relations in the mainland, the law of the forum shall apply to the divorce by litigation, and the mainland law may be applied as the applicable law for the trial of the dispute in this case. After Chen and Zhang went through the marriage registration, they had the experience of helping each other and maintaining the family together.

Based on the evidence in the case, and comprehensively considering the fact that the parties had already lived together and registered their marriage after the bride price was paid, and that the expenses and expenses during the period of living together in Macao were all paid by Zhang, Zhang's claim that the bride price had been converted into joint expenses was adopted.

The judgment granted the divorce to the parties, and Zhang returned the jade bracelet to Chen, rejecting Chen's claim for the return of the 40,000 yuan bride price.

Typical significance

For common living expenses and does not need to be returned

According to the Zhuhai Intermediate People's Court, the bride price is a moral gift from the man to the woman based on the promise of the marriage contract, which is a traditional marriage custom in the mainland and has a broad social and cultural basis.

In this case, the people's court, in accordance with the principles of fairness and the principles of public order and good customs, combined with factors such as whether the parties lived together, the actual use of the bride price, and the economic level of the parties, determined in accordance with the law that the bride price had been used for marriage preparation or joint living expenses did not need to be returned, which was conducive to properly balancing the interests of both parties and promoting healthy and civilized marriage customs.

Typical Case 3

The man couldn't accept the fact of the breakup and accused the woman of cheating on social platforms

Chen (female) and Huang were originally lovers, and both parties were also university alumni. After the two parties broke up, Huang couldn't accept the facts, so he posted four videos containing Chen's name, school and major, grade, place of origin, and parents' occupation on his registered Douyin account from March 2023, in which the video told the details of his relationship with Chen, accused Chen of cheating, and said that Chen "had an affair with many boys", "cuckolded each object", "pretended to be affectionate and set up PUA others", "secretly did his old job", "sister below", etc. After the video was released, a large number of Internet users gave negative comments on Chen in the comment area, eating melons, etc. Chen believed that Huang's relevant behavior infringed on his privacy and reputation rights, so he sued the court to demand that Huang apologize, compensate for moral damages, and defend his rights for reasonable expenses.

The effective judgment of the Guangzhou Internet Court held that privacy refers to the tranquility of a natural person's private life and the private space, private activities and private information that he or she does not want others to know. Without Chen's consent, Huang disclosed Chen's school and major, grade, and details of the relationship between the two parties in his Douyin account. The above information is private within a certain range, and combined with the context of Huang's relevant remarks and the background of the dispute between the two parties, Chen obviously does not want his relevant information to be disclosed in this way. Therefore, Huang's unauthorized disclosure of Chen's private information in his Douyin account infringed on Chen's right to privacy. At the same time, Huang posted the remarks involved in the case on his Douyin account to personally attack and degrade Chen's personality, which exceeded the legal limit of the evaluation, was subjectively at fault, objectively caused Chen's social evaluation to be lowered, and infringed Chen's right to reputation. Accordingly, Huang was ordered to apologize to Chen on his Douyin account, and pay Chen 4,000 yuan in compensation for moral damages and reasonable expenses for rights protection.

Typical significance

Safeguard women's right to privacy and reputation

The Guangzhou Internet Court held that this case was a typical case of online infringement disputes over privacy and reputation rights caused by emotional disputes.

The people's courts have lawfully made negative appraisals of the leakage of women's private information and derogatory of women's personality in the form of text, pictures, audio or video, etc., truly protecting women's rights to privacy and reputation, and is conducive to guiding the public to consciously regulate online speech and deeds, and creating a positive online environment.

Integration: Zhu Lin

Written by: Nandu reporter Zhao Qing correspondent Zeng Jieyun Sun Xin

Part of the text source: Shenzhen Business Daily