Study On Legal Basis For Victims In Fraudulent Raising

False paternity,which challenges the authenticity of genetic connection,occurs frequently out of a man's trust in the basic relationship(marriage,cohabitation,sexual relations etc.)between him and the child's mother.In legislation,solutions of such cases hasn't been expressly and wholly stated in law,administrative regulations or any other effective legal documents.In judicial practice,judgements of such cases differ with regard to result of judgement and reasons which support it.By means of summarizing,comparing and analyzing the point of views in judicial practice and in academic circles,this paper aims at providing reliable legal basis for those who have established upbringing relationship with dependents who aren't geneticly related.This paper includes six parts:Part I:The foreword involves questions to answer,aims to achieve,and research methods used in this paper.To prove academic research of this topic shall make sense in judicial practice and academic circles,this part introduces social reasons which cause such cases,how legislation and legal practice operate in such cases,and deficiencies of current academic research of this topic.Part II:This part summaries point of views in judicial practice.The theory of foundation of right of claim is applied.Claimants("grandparents","father"),defendants(natural father,mother)and aims of claim(compensation for property and non-property damage)are defined at first.It is found that three facts shall influence the result of judgement and foundations of right of claim applied in such cases:(1)who is targeted as compensation obligor;(2)which aim of claim is proposed:compensation for property damage or compensation for non-property damage;(3)whether mother breached duty of loyalty between couples.To show the difference of foundations of right of claim applied in judicial practice,we'll have to distinguish the cases into two situations:when mother is targeted and when natural father is targeted.Under each situation,whether judges support or reject claims of compensation for property or non-property damage,what kinds of reasons are stated and legal basis is quoted will be shown in the text.Part III:This part is focused on the definition of fraudulent raising and the scope of this topic.The process of changes in the definition of fraudulent raising will be introduced and where the name "fraudulent raising" doesn't match with the content of the definition.For fear of predetermined conclusion,scoping what should be discussed in this topic should give priority to describing the facts.When the fact happens that a "father" or "grandparents" has raised a child or given financial support to him and the child turns out to be not geneticly related with them,it falls into this topic.The reason why they have misconception only affects the choice of foundation of right of claim.The legitimacy of regulating relations of marriage and family by Marriage Law and other civil laws should be and is provedPart IV foucuses on foundations of right of claims of compensation for property damage.It denies the opinion that such claim shouldn't be supported.Different reasons in favor of such claim are examined in a critical way and all possible foundations of right of claim are considered at the same time.Finally,"void act" theory,"breach of contract" theory and "negotiorum gestio" theory are denied.Methods inside the Marriage Law are considered first,namely,claim for compensation for divorce damage and dividing jointly-owned property in favor of innocent party.However,the former method may only apply to a narrow scope of cases discussed in this paper and the latter one is always applied when other methods don't work.When the marriage law fails to provide a reliable legal basis for those who suffer loss,it is theoretically and practically possible to seek legal basis in other civil laws.The right of claim for infringement indemnity and unjust enrichment are proved to be tenable.The components of this two foundations of right of claim and the relationship between them when they both can be applied are also illustrated.part V foucuses on claim for compensation of non-property damage.This part gives top priority to demonstration of which civil right or interest is infringed.On the basis of examining different opinions in academic circles and judicial practice,this part proves that what is infringed in such cases is the personality interest of prohibiting others from hiding key facts which is vital to personal development from a person.Part VI is closure and suggestions.It summarizes the conclusions of this paper and put forward the steps how the courts deals with such cases and the legal baisis they should quote.It also briefly summarizes how to determine the liability for compensation,which aims at according consistent judgments to similar cases.