| With the deepening of the opening, our country’s economy, society, culture and the rapid development. Americans for the easing of "sex" attitude, breaking the "get married and have children must hook" traditional thinking, a large number of born out of wedlock and the resulting poses challenges to the existing laws and regulations of all kinds of disputes. Protection of wedlock legitimate interests, and promote the harmonious development of society, has been placed in the position of pressing.Based on "Yang Guiying v Su Rong for for support" for lead, around compulsively for genetic identification problems, collecting evidence of indirect evidence of benefit maximum principle rules and born out of wedlock conflict problem, the related lawsuit apply conciliation system problem, about the contract agreement legitimacy and rationality of personal relations and other issues to discuss.I think, should be given the court in dealing with some related litigation compulsory, collecting evidence to remove obstruction of proof, protection of rights and interests of born out of wedlock, and safeguard fairness and justice of law, but the rights should be given strict limits, cautious. For applicable indirect evidence, in this kind of the lawsuit involving personal relation, should be some flexibility, the circumstantial evidence is enough to or through relatives can form tight chain of evidence, the appraisal results can be directly applicable, give the indirect evidence of stronger evidence of effectiveness. Conciliation is the discount for dealing with such cases in the judicial practice in the process, but in the mediation needs to further perfect the details of the content, etc. Conciliation agreement in this case for children born out of wedlock in the future personal rights limits, the author thinks that the contents and runs counter to the spirit of the law, and there is follow-up to a variety of legal and ethical issues, hold the negative attitude. |
PDF Full Text Request