The court sentenced three minors to take responsibility for bullying their classmates and causing severe depression
Strengthening functions, integrating education with trial, and protecting the healthy growth of children through the rule of law
The healthy growth of minors is related to the happiness and peace of hundreds of millions of families, the harmony and stability of society, and the prosperity of the nation. Recently, the Higher People's Court of Jilin Province held a press conference to inform the whole society about the juvenile trial work of the courts across the province in 2023 and released typical cases of juvenile trials.
A reporter from the Legal Daily sorted out relevant cases and explained the law through cases, calling on all sectors of society to pay attention to the protection of minors and jointly create a good legal environment for the healthy growth of minors.
Ji and Li met online, got married and had a son, Li, but because the two did not fully understand each other before marriage, they often quarreled over trivial matters in their married life and even called the police many times. In December 2023, Ji filed for divorce in court on the grounds that the relationship between the couple could no longer be restored.
After mediation, both parties confirmed their intention to divorce and reached an agreement on child custody: Li agreed to divorce and asked to raise the child Li. Ji agreed that Li would directly raise Li, but was worried that Li would not let him see the child after the divorce.
The presiding judge believed that the significance of visitation rights is to allow the party who does not directly raise the children after the divorce to achieve parent-child interaction in a divorced family by meeting with the children regularly and living together for a short period of time. On the one hand, it is conducive to maintaining the father-son relationship, and on the other hand, it ensures that the children receive the love of both parents, to the greatest extent possible to bridge the emotional damage brought to the children by the divorce of their parents, and to ensure the healthy growth of minors. In order to eliminate Ji's concerns and to guide Li to cooperate in exercising the visitation rights, the presiding judge organized both parties to sign the "Visitation Rights Implementation Commitment".
After mediation by the court, the two parties reached a mediation agreement: Ji and Li divorced, and the child Li was directly raised by Li. In order to eliminate the concerns of the parties and ensure the visitation rights of the party who does not directly raise the child, the court suggested that the two parties sign a "Visit Rights Implementation Commitment" to ensure strict compliance with the terms of the commitment, properly handle visitation matters, and jointly care for the healthy growth of the child.
The presiding judge said that in recent years, the issue of child visitation derived from divorce has been more prominent, and the issue of enforcement of visitation for underage children is also a difficult point. In this case, the two parties had disputes over the issue of child visitation, and guided the two parties to voluntarily sign the "Visit Rights Execution Commitment". On the one hand, the non-direct custody party can be informed of the legal provisions of the visitation rights, that is, to consciously, reasonably and appropriately exercise the visitation rights after the dissolution of the marriage relationship. On the other hand, the direct custody party is urged to cooperate with the other party in exercising the visitation rights and jointly fulfill the responsibility of family education. It not only constrains and supervises the reasonable exercise of the visitation rights and legal cooperation of the divorce parties, but also prevents the occurrence of derivative contradictions and disputes and even forced enforcement to a certain extent. It also provides new ideas and new paths for solving the "visiting dilemma", reduces the "secondary" harm caused by divorce to underage children, and adds a "bumper" to protect the rights and interests of minors.
Chen, Jin, Ning, and Li were classmates at a middle school. Since entering school in August 2020, Chen has been bullied by his classmates for nearly a year. At the end of August 2021, Chen's father found that Chen often had headaches, vomited, and even had suicidal behavior. After questioning, he learned that Chen had been bullied and called the police.
The local public security agency found that Jin, Ning, Li and others had repeatedly asked Chen to provide them with pocket money and snacks, and even beat, scolded, insulted and threatened Chen. Chen and his father went to the hospital for treatment many times. The hospital diagnosed Chen with severe depression and severe anxiety. The judicial appraisal showed that Chen had post-traumatic stress disorder and there was a direct causal relationship between the traumatic incident.
The court held that Jin, Ning, and Li each committed tortious acts, causing Chen to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, and therefore the three should bear tort liability. When performing their guardianship duties, the guardians of the three did not provide adequate education and guidance to their respective children, and subjectively neglected to perform their guardianship duties, and should be held responsible for their children's tortious acts. A certain middle school failed to fulfill its educational and management responsibilities and should also bear corresponding responsibilities. Based on this, the court ruled that Jin, Ning, Li and their guardians, and a certain middle school should compensate Chen for medical expenses, food allowance during hospitalization, nursing fees, transportation fees, and mental damage compensation within the scope of their respective responsibilities.
At the same time, the court believes that in school bullying cases, the families of the students at fault have an unshirkable responsibility for education and guardianship, so they fully communicated with the minors involved in the case and their parents in terms of doing a good job in family education and cultivating a good family tradition, and issued a "Family Education Guidance Order" along with the case, so that the judgment and the family education order form a two-way synergy. At the same time, the court also made relevant reasonable suggestions to the school, and organized legal education activities such as judges entering campuses, warning educational institutions to take effective measures to actively prevent, promptly discover and effectively stop campus violence, and create a safe and harmonious learning and growth environment for minors.
The presiding judge said that school bullying seriously endangers the healthy growth of minors and has become a hot issue of concern to the whole society. In this case, the behavior of the three minors involved was not just a fight between classmates, but a serious infringement and illegal behavior. If we do not pay attention to this in time and adopt the attitude of "making a big deal out of a small deal", we will condone the infringement and cause serious consequences. This is not conducive to protecting the minor victims, nor is it conducive to the healthy growth of the minor infringers in the future.
Fu and Mou are a married couple who have two daughters. The eldest daughter, Fu A, was born in February 2016 and is currently in primary school. The second daughter, Fu B, was born in February 2020 and suffers from congenital vascular malformation. In September 2019, Fu was electrocuted to death while providing labor services for Sun. Fu A, Fu B, and Mou reached a compensation agreement with Sun and issued a letter of forgiveness for Sun, who was sentenced to probation.
Later, because Sun did not fulfill the compensation agreement, Fu A, Fu B and Mou took him to court. Under the mediation of the court, the following mediation agreement was reached: Sun compensated Fu A, Fu B and Mou 130,000 yuan and interest.
During the execution of the mediation agreement, Sun died of illness and had no property to be executed, so the case was terminated. After Fu died, Fu A and Fu B were raised by Mou alone. Mou had no job and needed to take care of both parents, so his life was very difficult. After being informed by the judge, Fu A, Fu B and Mou applied for judicial assistance.
The court held that Fu was electrocuted to death while providing labor services for others, and because the tortfeasor died and had no property to be executed, his wife Mou and two underage daughters Fu A and Fu B were unable to obtain compensation through litigation and fell into hardship. They met the conditions for assistance stipulated in the "Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Strengthening and Standardizing the National Judicial Assistance Work of the People's Courts" and should be granted judicial assistance. Taking into account the applicants' age, health status, degree of family difficulties, and the average monthly salary of employees in Jilin Province last year, the court decided to grant the applicants Fu A, Fu B, and Mou a judicial assistance fund of 65,000 yuan.
The presiding judge said that the applicants in this case, Fu A and Fu B, are both minors, and Fu B suffers from congenital diseases. His father died in an accident while providing labor services for others, and his mother has no stable job and economic income. Because the infringer is unable to compensate, Fu A and Fu B cannot obtain compensation through litigation, and their lives are in urgent difficulties. In this case, the People's Court informed the relatives of the victims of the infringement case to apply for judicial assistance in accordance with its authority during the execution process, and actively guided the applicants to complete the assistance application. The judge handling the assistance case promptly went to the applicant's home to verify the situation and ensured that the assistance funds in this case were distributed to the applicants as quickly as possible, so that the living difficulties of Fu A and Fu B were alleviated. This case fully reflects the functional attributes of the state's judicial assistance of "emergency relief" and the value pursuit of "strengthening survival security", and conveys the judicial warmth of the People's Court.
Li and Sun registered their marriage in June 2015 and gave birth to a daughter, Sun, in February 2016. In March 2023, Li and his daughter Sun applied to the court for a personal safety protection order, claiming that Sun had committed domestic violence against them, and submitted hospital medical records, police report receipts, interrogation records issued by the public security organs, and a domestic violence warning letter issued to Sun.
The court held that Sun was a person without civil capacity, and Li, as Sun's legal representative, had the right to apply to the court for a personal safety protection order. The existing evidence in this case showed that Li and Sun were in real danger of domestic violence, and the application of Li and Sun met the statutory conditions for a personal safety protection order. Based on the above facts, the court ruled in accordance with the law to prohibit Sun from committing domestic violence against Li and Sun.
The presiding judge said that minors may also become victims of domestic violence, and tolerance and appeasement will only make the perpetrators more violent and cause more serious adverse consequences. The Law on the Protection of Minors stipulates that parents or other guardians of minors shall not infringe upon the physical and mental health, property rights and interests of minors or fail to perform their obligations to protect minors in accordance with the law. When there is evidence that a minor may face the real danger of domestic violence, the guardian or social organization may apply to the people's court for a personal safety protection order. Domestic violence is not a family or private matter, but an illegal act expressly stipulated by the law. It is the unshirkable responsibility of the court to prevent and punish various forms of domestic violence in accordance with the law and maintain family harmony and social stability.
In this case, while the court issued a personal safety protection order in accordance with the law and served it to all parties involved, it also served it to their community street organizations and public security organs. All parties formed a joint force to fight against domestic violence, increased deterrence against the perpetrators, effectively eliminated and stopped domestic violence, ensured the effectiveness of the enforcement of the personal safety protection order, and ensured that the law no longer remained on paper.
Article 1086 After divorce, the parent who does not directly raise the children has the right to visit the children, and the other party has the obligation to assist.
The manner and time of exercising the right of visitation shall be agreed upon by the parties; if no agreement is reached, the People's Court shall make a judgment.
If the father or mother's visit to the child is not conducive to the child's physical and mental health, the People's Court shall suspend the visit in accordance with the law; the visit shall be resumed after the reason for the suspension disappears.
Article 118 Where the parents or other guardians of a minor fail to perform their guardianship duties in accordance with the law or infringe upon the legal rights and interests of the minor, the residents' committee or villagers' committee of their place of residence shall admonish and stop them; where the circumstances are serious, the residents' committee or villagers' committee shall promptly report to the public security organ.
If the public security organs receive reports or the public security organs, the people's procuratorates, and the people's courts discover that the parents or other guardians of minors are in the above-mentioned circumstances during the handling of cases, they shall give them admonitions and may order them to receive family education guidance.
Article 49 If the public security organs, the people's procuratorates, and the people's courts discover in the course of handling cases that minors have engaged in serious bad behavior or have committed criminal acts, or that the parents or other guardians of minors have not properly implemented family education and have infringed upon the legal rights and interests of the minors, they shall, depending on the circumstances, admonish the parents or other guardians and may order them to receive family education guidance.
