摘要
上海首例侵犯贞操权案法院判决"贞操权"是一项独立的权利,且被告隐瞒已婚事实与原告发生性关系构成侵权行为,均值得商榷。"贞操权"概念欠缺法理基础,因为其客体和主体均难以界定。"贞操权"也没有独立存在的必要,因为未经同意或瑕疵同意而发生性关系应由身体权规范去调整。本案被告应不构成侵权,因为婚姻状况不是与身体接触直接相关的信息,不属于被告男方的告知义务范围,故被告不构成利用原告的瑕疵同意侵犯其身体权。本案判决实际上将性行为告知义务范围扩展到婚姻状况,这将使法律过多地介入公民的私生活以及道德调整范围,且可能导致滥诉现象。
In the first case of infringement of the right of chastity in Shanghai,the judgment of court stated that'the right of chastity'is independent. And the defendant constituted an infringement by the behaviors,concealing the fact of being married,and having sexual relations with the plaintiff. But these are questionable. The concept of'the chastity right'is lack of legal basis,for its subject and object are difficult to define. 'The right of chastity'has no necessary to exist independently,because the occurrence of sexual relations without consent or defect consent should be prescribed by body rights norm. The defendant in this case should not constitute infringement,because marriage is not directly related to physical contact information,does not belong to the defendant's obligation to inform,so the defendant does not constitute the infringement of body rights by use of the plaintiff's defect consent. This case decision extends the inform obligation range of sexual behavior to marriage status,which will make the law too much intervene in the private life of citizens and moral adjustment range,and can lead to rampant litigation.
出处
《重庆第二师范学院学报》
2015年第6期13-16,166,共4页
Journal of Chongqing University of Education
基金
教育部2010年人文社科项目(YJAB20064)
关键词
“贞操权”
身体权
侵权
判决
the right of chastity
body rights
infringement
judgment
