The man has been working outside for a long time, and the son he has raised for 8 years is not his own! Claim against the child's biological father

Southern Metropolis Daily

2024-05-12 10:39Published on the official account of Guangdong Southern Metropolis Daily

On May 12, a reporter from Nandu learned from the People's Court of Wuwei City, Anhui Province, that the court recently concluded a dispute over unjust enrichment. In the case, a man found out through a paternity test that his 8-year-old son was not born to him, so he sued the child's biological father in court and demanded compensation of 380,000 yuan. In the end, the court ruled that the defendant should return a total of 118,400 yuan in a lump sum, including child support, spiritual solatium, and paternity testing fees. 

The facts of the case show that in April 2009, Wu and Hua registered their marriage. In November 2015, Hua gave birth to a son, named Xiaoguo. In order to support his family, Wu works hard outside alone all the year round, while Hua takes care of his son full-time at home. One day in September 2023, Xue's wife, who was in the process of divorce, quietly revealed to Wu that Xue and Hua had an abnormal relationship, which shocked and made Wu suspicious. In order to quickly find out the truth, Wu asked Xue and Xiaoguo to do a paternity test twice. An appraisal opinion issued by a judicial appraisal institute in Anhui ruled out that Wu was Xiaoguo's biological father, and supported the determination that Xue was the biological father of the child.

The two sides immediately clashed, and Wu asked Xue to give an explanation and a solution. Xue said that he was getting divorced and had no money to compensate. Wu sued Xue to the court, requesting the court to immediately return 180,000 yuan of Wu's child support fees for 8 years for unjust enrichment, and also required to pay 200,000 yuan for mental damage and 2,400 yuan for paternity testing, totaling more than 380,000 yuan.

After hearing the case, the court held that unjust enrichment means that if the gainer obtains improper benefits without legal basis, the person who suffers losses may request the gainer to return the benefits obtained. After judicial appraisal, it was confirmed that the plaintiff Wu and the child Xiaoguo did not have a parent-child relationship, and the defendant Xue and the child had a parent-child relationship.

Wu had no obligation to support Xiaoguo, and raised Xue's son because he didn't know it. As the party who was defrauded to raise the child, the maintenance fees paid by him after the birth of the child constituted unjust enrichment for the child's biological father, Xue, so Wu's exercise of the right to claim unjust enrichment and require Xue to return the maintenance expenses that had been incurred was in accordance with the law.

During the existence of the marital relationship between Wu and Hua, Xue and Hua had an improper relationship between men and women and had children. After the child was born, Hua did not inform Wu of the truth in a timely manner, but tacitly let him perform his maintenance obligations without knowing it, which seriously violated public order and good customs. The above acts obviously caused physical and mental pain and injury to Wu, and his personal dignity must have been damaged, so Wu's claim for the payment of solatium for mental damages is based on the law.

Based on the actual circumstances of the case and the local living consumption level, the court supported the reasonable part of the plaintiff's claim as appropriate, and ordered Xue to return 96,000 yuan in child support to Wu in a lump sum, 20,000 yuan in spiritual solace and 2,400 yuan in paternity testing fees, totaling 118,400 yuan. After the verdict was pronounced, both parties accepted the verdict.

Written by: Nandu reporter Weng Anqi

View original image 219K

•