[2] The defendant refuses a paternity test; the court has the right to make inferences according to law.
Compiled from: Laixi Court
Case review
[4] In 2014, Zhang (male) and Han (female) registered their marriage, and their first son, Zhang Jia, was born in 2015. In November 2016, Han became pregnant again, and their second son, Han Jia, was born in August of the following year. In May 2019, the couple divorced by agreement, stipulating that Han Jia would be directly raised by Han. In September of the same year, Zhang requested to visit Han Jia, and Han said in a WeChat voice message: "The child isn't yours, why are you visiting? The child belongs to the Han family." Suspecting that Han Jia was not his biological son, Zhang filed a lawsuit, requesting a legal confirmation that Han Jia was not his biological child and demanding that Han return the child support he had paid before the divorce.
[5] After trial, the Laixi Court found that before October 2018, Zhang had been working in the Huangdao District of Qingdao, taking irregular monthly days off and only returning to Laixi on his days off. In November 2016, Zhang was home on leave from the 9th to the 15th, spending the rest of the time in Huangdao. When Han underwent prenatal screening on March 21, 2017, her gestational age was determined to be 17 weeks and 4 days, meaning the conception date was around November 19.
It was further ascertained that five months after Han Moujia's birth, Han Mou took Han Moujia and a male friend (Zhao Mou) to have a "100-day photo" taken. Han Mou admitted that about five months after the divorce, she began a romantic relationship with Zhao Mou, and the two registered their marriage on November 4, 2019.
During the proceedings, Zhang Mou applied for a paternity test, but Han Mou refused.
Relevant Legal Provisions
Article 2 of the Interpretation (III) of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China
If one spouse files a lawsuit with the People's Court requesting confirmation that a parent-child relationship does not exist and has provided necessary evidence to support the claim, while the other spouse has no contrary evidence and refuses to undergo a paternity test, the People's Court may presume that the claim of the spouse requesting confirmation of the non-existence of the parent-child relationship is established.
[1] Court Opinion
In this case, Han Mou refused to undergo a paternity test. To determine whether a parent-child relationship exists between Zhang Mou and Han Moujia, the key issue is whether Zhang Mou has provided necessary evidence. Based on Han Mou's prenatal screening results, it can be inferred that the report confirmed her conception date was around November 19, 2016, which is medically referred to as the date of the pregnant woman's last menstrual period, and the actual conception date should be on or after that date. According to the evidence provided by Zhang Mou, he was working at the company around that date. Furthermore, in traditional Chinese customs, a child's "100-day celebration" holds significant importance. Han Mou did not take Han Moujia's "100-day" photo with her husband Zhang Mou but instead took it with Zhao Mou, whom she claimed was an ordinary friend, which goes against traditional customs. Additionally, their intimate behavior in the photo was inconsistent with the status of ordinary friends.
[1] In summary, the court found that the evidence provided by Zhang had reached the necessary level. Since Han neither provided contrary evidence nor refused to undergo a paternity test, the court legally presumed that Zhang and Han A do not have a biological father-child relationship. Because Han violated marital fidelity obligations, the court supported Zhang’s claim for reimbursement of expenses incurred in raising Han A. The court determined the amount of child support to be 12,000 yuan.
[2] After the judgment, Han appealed, but still refused to undergo a paternity test during the second instance and withdrew the appeal after the court hearing.
[1] The author's perspective
[3] The determination of parent-child relationships is universally governed by the "principle of maternal certainty" in laws worldwide. Disputed parent-child relationships generally refer to the relationship between a child and the biological father. The most accurate method to determine whether a man is the biological father is a paternity test. However, if one party refuses to undergo a paternity test, it would be unfair for the court to directly dismiss the claim due to insufficient evidence, and it would be detrimental to maintaining public order, good customs, and social stability. Therefore, in such cases, the determination of parent-child relationships does not require "evidence sufficient to confirm or refute the facts." It only requires the claiming party to provide necessary evidence that leads the adjudicator to believe in the possibility of certain facts. If the other party fails to provide contrary evidence to refute it, the claim for confirming or denying the parent-child relationship should be supported.
[4] Of course, does meeting the evidentiary standard mentioned in the second provision necessarily require the presumption of the existence or non-existence of a parent-child relationship? Clearly, the answer is no. The second provision states that the people's court "may" presume, not "must" presume. When making a presumption, the court should fully consider the impact of the judgment on the marital relationship, family relationship, and the child's psychology and development. Additionally, for children over eight years old, their wishes should be sought and fully respected, and the law should not be applied mechanically to make a presumption.
[5] As the saying goes, "It takes a hundred years of cultivation to share a boat crossing, and a thousand years to share a pillow." Couples should cherish the hard-earned fate, remain faithful and respectful to each other, and live in harmony to build a happy family.
