|
艾滋病误检致人名誉财产受损要赔偿
作者： 翟全军 发布时间： 2010-03-18 11:43:54
【问题提示】
权威部门误检艾滋病致人名誉和财产受损，该如何担责？
【要点提示】
误检使他人当了两年半艾滋病人，期间蒙受名誉及财产损失，肇事部门既要因侵害名誉权而承担精神损害赔偿责任，也要因侵害名誉权而承担由此造成的财产损失。
【案例索引】
一审：西安市碑林区人民法院（2009）碑民一初字698号（2009年11月2日）
二审：西安市中级人民法院（2010）西民二终字第11号（2010年1月8日）
【案情】
上诉人（原审被告）西安市疾病预防控制中心，住所地西安市西影路65号。
被上诉人（原审原告）冯战强，男，1976年2月15日出生，汉族，无业，住西安市莲湖区堡子村182号。
原审被告陕西省疾病预防控制中心，住所地西安市建东街3号。
原审被告西安市雁塔区疾病预防控制中心，住所地西安市翠华北路345号。
2005年11月15日，原告冯战强因吸毒被西安市劳教所劳动教养一年。2006年5月底，雁塔区疾控中心协助西安市劳教所采集冯战强血样，进行抽血化验，经过市疾控中心初筛为HIV抗体为阳性，省疾控中心确诊仍为阳性。省疾控中心于2006年6月9日出具了原告冯战强HIV抗体为阳性的报告。同年6月，市疾控中心将原告冯战强的名字发布于艾滋病专报网。2008年8月，原告冯战强因车祸被送往西安市高新医院进行手术治疗，经化验发现其并未感染艾滋病。2008年12月9日，由莲湖区疾控中心再次采集血样送省疾控中心检测，省疾控中心经检测出具了编号为08—233号HIV抗体检测确认被告，报告结论为“HIV抗体阴性”。两份报告备注栏中均有“仅对本次样本负责”的字样。
2009年2月5日，陕西省艾滋病检测诊断中心给莲湖区疾控中心致函，内容为：“雁塔区疾病预防控制中心2006年5月底，协助西安市劳教所采集冯战强先生血样，初检阳性后送我中心确诊仍为阳性。2008年12月9日冯战强因其他原因，由莲湖区疾控中心再次采集血样送我中心检测为HIV抗体阴性。造成前阳后阴的情况有四种：一是送检血样弄错，二是送检血样被污染，三是实验室差错，四是出现艾滋病“精英”现象（先确诊阳性而后转阴——笔者注）。分析冯战强第一份血样经多种试剂，多家单位初筛，确认均为阳性的情况，我中心认为此份血样受污染而错判的可能性大。对此，三级疾控系统对冯战强致歉。同时对冯先生没有感染艾滋病病毒表示欣慰并给予祝贺。我们也诚望冯先生掌握更多艾滋病预防知识，拒绝艾滋病病毒于体外。
后华商报于2009年2月6日以题为《误诊使他当了两年半艾滋病人》，2009年2月13日以题为《误诊艾滋病省市区三级疾控致歉》对此进行了报道。
原告以由于被告的误检，给自己造成巨大的精神伤害及经济损失，起诉要求三被告：1、恢复名誉、消除影响并赔礼道歉；2、赔偿房租损失50000元；3、赔偿误工费39000元；4、赔偿精神损失费50000元；5、诉讼费由被告承担。
三被告均以自己无过错为由不同意原告的诉讼请求。
【审判】
一审法院认为，公民享有名誉权。被告雁塔区疾控中心在配合西安市劳教所对被劳教人员进行抽血化验，原告的血样经市疾控中心初筛HIV抗体为阳性，省疾控中心对送检血样作了HIV抗体为阳性的报告后，市疾控中心未慎重处理，而将原告姓各公布于艾滋病专报网，存在一定的过错。给原告带来无形的精神痛苦。市疾控中心应承担原告由此而带来的精神损失。雁塔区疾控中心只负责采集血样，并未作出确认报告，省疾控中心仅对送检血样负责，而不对被采集人负责，故不应承担侵权赔偿责任。省艾滋病检测诊断中心致函莲湖区疾控中心，表示三级疾控系统对冯战强致歉。现原告要求三被告恢复名誉、消除影响并赔礼道歉，因市疾控中心将原告姓名公布于艾滋病专报网，故应由市疾控中心为原告恢复名誉、消除影响并赔礼道歉。市疾控中心对冯战强精神损失承担相应的赔偿责任。原告主张房租损失、误工费之诉讼请求，其未提供被误诊艾滋病与房租、误工之间存在因果关系，其主张本院不予支持。据此，依照《中华人民共和国民法通则》第五条、第一百零一条、第一百二十条、第一百三十四条，最高人民法院关于贯彻《中华人民共和国民法通则若干问题的意见》第一百五十条，最高人民法院《关于审理名誉权案件若干问题的解释》第八条之规定，判决如下：
一、本判决生效之日起三十日内，西安市疾病预防控制中心为原告冯战强恢复名誉、消除影响，赔礼道歉（道歉内容以法院核定为准）。
二、本判决生效之日起三十日内，被告西安市疾病预防控制中心赔偿原告冯战强精神抚慰金20000元。
如果未按本判决规定的期间履行给付金钱的义务，应当依照《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第二百二十九条的规定，加倍支付迟延履行期间的债务利息。
四、驳回原告冯战强要求三被告赔偿房租损失50000元之诉讼请求。
五、驳回原告冯战强要求三被告赔偿误工费39000元的诉讼请求。
诉讼费3212元，原告负担1500元，西安市疾病预防控制中心负担1712元（此款原告已预交，被告于本判决生效后直付原告）。
宣判后，西安市疾病预防控制中心不服，提起上诉。经西安市中级人民法院主持，双方当事人自愿达成如下协议：
在本调解书签收之日，西安市疾病预防控制中心、陕西省疾病预防控制中心、西安市雁塔区疾病预防控制中心各向冯战强支付8000元经济补助金。
本案再无其他争议。
一审诉讼费3212元（冯战强已预交1606元），由冯战强负担1606元、西安市疾病预防控制中心负担1606元；二审诉讼费300元（减半收取150元）由西安市疾病预防控制中心承担150元。
【评析】
一、侵权赔偿，是一方担责，还是三方担责？
对于因权威的艾滋病检测单位误检艾滋病而侵害了冯战强的名誉权一节，应该不存在争议。只是该由谁来担责？对冯战强来说，不管问题出在哪个环节，反正是疾控部门出错了，应该赔偿损失，公开致歉，还自己清白，使自己过上正常的生活。
一审认定因市疾控中心将原告姓名公布于艾滋病专报网，故应由市疾控中心应为原告恢复名誉、消除影响、赔礼道歉，对冯战强精神损失承担相应的赔偿责任。二审则改由省市区三级疾控中心各支付冯战强8000元经济补助金，虽然没有了恢复名誉、消除影响，赔礼道歉的条款，且精神损害抚慰金亦改换成了“经济补助金”，实际上是由三方共同承担了侵权赔偿责任。
陕西省艾滋病检测诊断中心给莲湖区疾控中心致函称：“分析冯战强第一份血样经多种试剂，多家单位初筛，确认均为阳性的情况，我中心认为此份血样受污染而错判的可能性大。对此，三级疾控系统对冯战强致歉。”据此，似乎是采血方雁塔区疾病预防控制中心的责任。但综合本案案情来看，省市区三级疾控中心均脱不了干系。因为：
1、在司法实践中，医疗过失，属于过错的一种。具体判断医方有无过失，应就医方是否已尽客观上的注意义务为标准，要求医师在进行医疗行为时，其学识、注意程度、技术以及态度均应符合具有一般医疗专业水准的医师于同一情况下所应遵循的标准。因此，医师在从事治疗时，怠于履行依该水准所应尽之注意义务，从而致他人身体或健康损害者，即应被认定为有过失。此标准同样适用于疾病预防控制机构。本案，冯战强之所以被误检成艾滋病人，一是送检血样弄错，二是送检血样被污染，三是实验室差错，四是出现艾滋病“精英”现象。检测单位不能证明冯战强是艾滋病“精英”现象，只能属于前三种情况，原告冯战强以三级疾控中心存在过错为由主张侵权赔偿，是符合法律规定的。
2、作为权威的艾滋病检测单位，被告应该知道一张艾滋病检测报告足以改变一个人正常的生活轨迹，并使之蒙受精神上的巨大痛苦和折磨。对冯战强被诊断出艾滋病毒染后，检测单位应考虑到有误诊的可能，更应考虑到这一消息的传出将给原告造成不良影响。但检测单位在事情尚未复查、得出最后结论之前，就通知相关人员并上网，致冯战强的名誉受损，这同样是一种过失。
（二）关于精神损害抚慰金的数额问题
到今天为止，艾滋病仍然是一个绝症，我们没有办法去解决它。对艾滋病人的恐惧、歧视仍是普遍存在的。一般人都认为艾滋病是通过性和血液传播的，感染艾滋病可能和患者的道德品质和生活作风有关，容易使人对患者的道德品质和生活作风产生负面评价，对人的名誉影响极大。就像《华商报》所报道的：
一张艾滋病检测报告足以改变一个人的生活，改变了西安市民冯战强的生活。患有艾滋病的消息仍在社会上不胫而走，大家见了他像躲瘟疫一样唯恐避之不及。这两年多，冯战强都不知道自己是怎么混过来的，“每天躺在床上，也没个人说话，我就想得了艾滋病会咋死……”就这样，冯战强无辜当了两年半的艾滋病人，不能正常工作、生活，饱受各种压力……
本案中，原告冯战强请求的精神损害抚慰金是50000元，一审判赔20000元，二审调解支付经济补助金24000元。对于一、二审的赔偿数额，原告冯战强均无异议，愿意接受。
只是，此款能弥补冯战强所遭受的巨大精神损害吗？
为什么不能按原告的请求判赔50000元精神损害赔偿金呢？
关于精神损害赔偿数额的确定标准，在我国现行法律中没有明确规定，2010年7月1日即将实行的《中华人民共和国侵权责任法》中亦未规定。司法实践中主要是赋予法官自由裁量的权力。所以往往出现了不仅是不同法院，就是同一法院不同法官在受理同类案件时，其结果都不一致。而且从此类案件的审判结果来看，我国目前普遍存在判决赔偿数额过低与当事人的诉讼请求悬殊的问题。为了提高法律的可操作性，一些地区通过地方性规定，根据本地区经济发展水平，制定出了当地精神损害赔偿数额的限额，如重庆市高级人民法院对辖区内精神损害赔偿案件赔偿标准作出最高限额10万元的规定；广州市人大曾确定精神赔偿数额为5万元的下限；上海市高级人民法院曾确定5万元的上限。这种对精神赔偿确定数额限制的做法是否可取？法律界人士说法不一。
反对者认为，规定一个上下限是不科学的，尤其是上限。因为精神赔偿主要作用是抚慰受害方，规定上限，等于封顶了，这样难免使一些被损害程度小的人得到多的赔偿，而损害大的人得到少的赔偿，这就失去了一个公平的氛围。精神损害赔偿具有补偿性、抚慰性、惩罚性的特征，应该根据对方的赔付能力、被害人的损害程度、在社会上引起的社会效果等不同情况来综合考虑赔偿数额。就本案来说，为更好地体现精神损害赔偿的功能，应该按原告的诉请数额50000判赔精神损害抚慰金。
（三）侵害他人人身权益造成财产损失的，按照被侵权人因此受到的损失赔偿
本案一审，原告冯战强除了提出恢复名誉、消除影响、赔礼道歉并赔偿精神损失费50000元两项诉请外，还有两项诉请，即：赔偿房租损失50000元；赔偿误工费39000元。理由是：由于被告的误检，他背了个艾滋病的名声，人们远远地躲着他，在长达两年半的时间里饱受折磨，不仅他个人的生活受到影响，无法工作，连家里和哥哥的房子都出租不出去，因此，要求被告赔偿房租损失和误工费。一审以原告未提供被误诊艾滋病与房租、误工之间存在因果关系，对其主张房租损失、误工费之诉讼请求不予支持。二审调解是以“经济补助金”的形式出现，看不出其中是否包含房租损失和误工费，只从24000元的数额来看，似乎未包含在内，即亦未支持此两项诉请。
那么，该不该支持原告的这两项诉请呢？
1993年8月7日《最高人民法院关于审理名誉权案件若干问题的解答》第十条就规定：“公民、法人因名誉权受到侵害要求赔偿的，侵权人应赔偿侵权行为造成的经济损失；公民并提出精神损害赔偿要求的，人民法院可根据侵权人的过错程度、侵权行为的具体情节、给受害人造成精神损害的后果等情况酌定。”
由此可以看出，原告的这两项诉请具有法律上的依据。
2010年7月1日即将实行的《中华人民共和国侵权责任法》第二十条规定：“侵害他人人身权益造成财产损失的，按照被侵权人因此受到的损失赔偿；被侵权人的损失难以确定，侵权人因此获得利益的，按照其获得的利益赔偿。侵权人因此获得的利益难以确定，被侵权人和侵权人就赔偿数额协商不一致，向人民法院提起诉讼的，由人民法院根据实际情况确定赔偿数额。”
此条法律规定，则更加明确了侵害人身权的财产损失计算方法，使之更具可操作性。
杨立新教授在其所著《<中华人民共和国侵权责任法>条文解释与司法适用》（人民法院出版社2010年1月版）一书第111—112页对此专门论述：“在司法实践中应当注意的是，这种人身权损害造成的财产损失，并不是只有生命权、健康权或者身体权，通常这样的人格权损害造成的财产损失，是通过法定的赔偿项目计算方法计算的，当然是按照损失赔偿；而侵害生命权、健康权或者身体权，多数侵权人并不因此而获得利益。因此，人身损害赔偿一般不采用本条规定的赔偿方法。对于侵害精神性人格权以及身份权等人身权，造成财产损失的，应当按照这样的办法进行赔偿。那就是，造成财产损失的，财产损失必须予以赔偿；如果财产损失难以确定，则按照侵权人因此获得利益的数额，确定赔偿责任。例如，侵害肖像权，侵权人用他人肖像做广告，获得财产利益，而被侵权的财产损失不易计算，按照侵权人所获利益确定赔偿责任，方便且易操作，是一个好的办法。”
综上，对于原告冯战强房租损失和误工费之赔偿诉请，一、二审均应酌情考虑，这样才能弥补其实际经济损失。
来源： 中国法院网陕西频道
- 艾滋病早期治疗是康复与延长30～60年生命的保
- 艾滋病免疫重建的重要意义是挽救生命的根本
- 从食品植物研究开发的治疗艾滋病新药三合皂甙
- 康生丹颗粒免疫实验提示符合艾滋病、肿瘤等应
- 鸡尾酒疗法并非万能，抗药性与毒副作用导致联合疗法与中药疗法应用的迫切性
- 公布几例康生丹治疗艾滋病的检测报告照片
- 康生丹配合西药治疗AIDS总结
- 三合皂甙，康生丹片
艾滋病誤檢致人名譽財產受損要賠償
作者： 翟全軍發佈時間： 2010-03-18 11:43:54
【問題提示】
權威部門誤檢艾滋病致人名譽和財產受損，該如何擔責？
【要點提示】
誤檢使他人當了兩年半艾滋病人，期間蒙受名譽及財產損失，肇事部門既要因侵害名譽權而承擔精神損害賠償責任，也要因侵害名譽權而承擔由此造成的財產損失。
【案例索引】
一審：西安市碑林區人民法院（2009）碑民一初字698號（2009年11月2日）
二審：西安市中級人民法院（2010）西民二終字第11號（2010年1月8日）
【案情】
上訴人（原審被告）西安市疾病預防控制中心，住所地西安市西影路65號。
被上訴人（原審原告）馮戰強，男，1976年2月15日出生，漢族，無業，住西安市蓮湖區堡子村182號。
原審被告陝西省疾病預防控制中心，住所地西安市建東街3號。
原審被告西安市雁塔區疾病預防控制中心，住所地西安市翠華北路345號。
2005年11月15日，原告馮戰強因吸毒被西安市勞教所勞動教養一年。 2006年5月底，雁塔區疾控中心協助西安市勞教所採集馮戰強血樣，進行抽血化驗，經過市疾控中心初篩為HIV抗體為陽性，省疾控中心確診仍為陽性。省疾控中心於2006年6月9日出具了原告馮戰強HIV抗體為陽性的報告。同年6月，市疾控中心將原告馮戰強的名字發佈於艾滋病專報網。 2008年8月，原告馮戰強因車禍被送往西安市高新醫院進行手術治療，經化驗發現其並未感染艾滋病。 2008年12月9日，由蓮湖區疾控中心再次採集血樣送省疾控中心檢測，省疾控中心經檢測出具了編號為08—233號HIV抗體檢測確認被告，報告結論為“HIV抗體陰性”。兩份報告備註欄中均有“僅對本次樣本負責”的字樣。
2009年2月5日，陝西省艾滋病檢測診斷中心給蓮湖區疾控中心致函，內容為：“雁塔區疾病預防控制中心2006年5月底，協助西安市勞教所採集馮戰強先生血樣，初檢陽性後送我中心確診仍為陽性。2008年12月9日馮戰強因其他原因，由蓮湖區疾控中心再次採集血樣送我中心檢測為HIV抗體陰性。造成前陽後陰的情況有四種：一是送檢血樣弄錯，二是送檢血樣被污染，三是實驗室差錯，四是出現艾滋病“精英”現象（先確診陽性而後轉陰——筆者註）。分析馮戰強第一份血樣經多種試劑，多家單位初篩，確認均為陽性的情況，我中心認為此份血樣受污染而錯判的可能性大。對此，三級疾控系統對馮戰強致歉。同時對馮先生沒有感染艾滋病病毒表示欣慰並給予祝賀。我們也誠望馮先生掌握更多艾滋病預防知識，拒絕艾滋病病毒於體外。
後華商報於2009年2月6日以題為《誤診使他當了兩年半艾滋病人》，2009年2月13日以題為《誤診艾滋病省市區三級疾控致歉》對此進行了報導。
原告以由於被告的誤檢，給自己造成巨大的精神傷害及經濟損失，起訴要求三被告：1、恢復名譽、消除影響並賠禮道歉；2、賠償房租損失50000元；3、賠償誤工費39000元；4、賠償精神損失費50000元；5、訴訟費由被告承擔。
三被告均以自己無過錯為由不同意原告的訴訟請求。
【審判】
一審法院認為，公民享有名譽權。被告雁塔區疾控中心在配合西安市勞教所對被勞教人員進行抽血化驗，原告的血樣經市疾控中心初篩HIV抗體為陽性，省疾控中心對送檢血樣作了HIV抗體為陽性的報告後，市疾控中心未慎重處理，而將原告姓各公佈於艾滋病專報網，存在一定的過錯。給原告帶來無形的精神痛苦。市疾控中心應承擔原告由此而帶來的精神損失。雁塔區疾控中心只負責採集血樣，並未作出確認報告，省疾控中心僅對送檢血樣負責，而不對被採集人負責，故不應承擔侵權賠償責任。省艾滋病檢測診斷中心致函蓮湖區疾控中心，表示三級疾控系統對馮戰強致歉。現原告要求三被告恢復名譽、消除影響並賠禮道歉，因市疾控中心將原告姓名公佈於艾滋病專報網，故應由市疾控中心為原告恢復名譽、消除影響並賠禮道歉。市疾控中心對馮戰強精神損失承擔相應的賠償責任。原告主張房租損失、誤工費之訴訟請求，其未提供被誤診艾滋病與房租、誤工之間存在因果關係，其主張本院不予支持。據此，依照《中華人民共和國民法通則》第五條、第一百零一條、第一百二十條、第一百三十四條，最高人民法院關於貫徹《中華人民共和國民法通則若干問題的意見》第一百五十條，最高人民法院《關於審理名譽權案件若干問題的解釋》第八條之規定，判決如下：
一、本判決生效之日起三十日內，西安市疾病預防控制中心為原告馮戰強恢復名譽、消除影響，賠禮道歉（道歉內容以法院核定為準）。
二、本判決生效之日起三十日內，被告西安市疾病預防控制中心賠償原告馮戰強精神撫慰金20000元。
如果未按本判決規定的期間履行給付金錢的義務，應當依照《中華人民共和國民事訴訟法》第二百二十九條的規定，加倍支付遲延履行期間的債務利息。
四、駁回原告馮戰強要求三被告賠償房租損失50000元之訴訟請求。
五、駁回原告馮戰強要求三被告賠償誤工費39000元的訴訟請求。
訴訟費3212元，原告負擔1500元，西安市疾病預防控制中心負擔1712元（此款原告已預交，被告於本判決生效後直付原告）。
宣判後，西安市疾病預防控制中心不服，提起上訴。經西安市中級人民法院主持，雙方當事人自願達成如下協議：
在本調解書籤收之日，西安市疾病預防控制中心、陝西省疾病預防控制中心、西安市雁塔區疾病預防控制中心各向馮戰強支付8000元經濟補助金。
本案再無其他爭議。
一審訴訟費3212元（馮戰強已預交1606元），由馮戰強負擔1606元、西安市疾病預防控制中心負擔1606元；二審訴訟費300元（減半收取150元）由西安市疾病預防控制中心承擔150元。
【評析】
一、侵權賠償，是一方擔責，還是三方擔責？
對於因權威的艾滋病檢測單位誤檢艾滋病而侵害了馮戰強的名譽權一節，應該不存在爭議。只是該由誰來擔責？對馮戰強來說，不管問題出在哪個環節，反正是疾控部門出錯了，應該賠償損失，公開致歉，還自己清白，使自己過上正常的生活。
一審認定因市疾控中心將原告姓名公佈於艾滋病專報網，故應由市疾控中心應為原告恢復名譽、消除影響、賠禮道歉，對馮戰強精神損失承擔相應的賠償責任。二審則改由省市區三級疾控中心各支付馮戰強8000元經濟補助金，雖然沒有了恢復名譽、消除影響，賠禮道歉的條款，且精神損害撫慰金亦改換成了“經濟補助金”，實際上是由三方共同承擔了侵權賠償責任。
陝西省艾滋病檢測診斷中心給蓮湖區疾控中心致函稱：“分析馮戰強第一份血樣經多種試劑，多家單位初篩，確認均為陽性的情況，我中心認為此份血樣受污染而錯判的可能性大。對此，三級疾控系統對馮戰強致歉。”據此，似乎是採血方雁塔區疾病預防控制中心的責任。但綜合本案案情來看，省市區三級疾控中心均脫不了乾系。因為：
1、在司法實踐中，醫療過失，屬於過錯的一種。具體判斷醫方有無過失，應就醫方是否已盡客觀上的注意義務為標準，要求醫師在進行醫療行為時，其學識、注意程度、技術以及態度均應符合具有一般醫療專業水準的醫師於同一情況下所應遵循的標準。因此，醫師在從事治療時，怠於履行依該水準所應盡之注意義務，從而致他人身體或健康損害者，即應被認定為有過失。此標準同樣適用於疾病預防控制機構。本案，馮戰強之所以被誤檢成艾滋病人，一是送檢血樣弄錯，二是送檢血樣被污染，三是實驗室差錯，四是出現艾滋病“精英”現象。檢測單位不能證明馮戰強是艾滋病“精英”現象，只能屬於前三種情況，原告馮戰強以三級疾控中心存在過錯為由主張侵權賠償，是符合法律規定的。
2、作為權威的艾滋病檢測單位，被告應該知道一張艾滋病檢測報告足以改變一個人正常的生活軌跡，並使之蒙受精神上的巨大痛苦和折磨。對馮戰強被診斷出艾滋病毒染後，檢測單位應考慮到有誤診的可能，更應考慮到這一消息的傳出將給原告造成不良影響。但檢測單位在事情尚未復查、得出最後結論之前，就通知相關人員並上網，致馮戰強的名譽受損，這同樣是一種過失。
（二）關於精神損害撫慰金的數額問題
到今天為止，艾滋病仍然是一個絕症，我們沒有辦法去解決它。對艾滋病人的恐懼、歧視仍是普遍存在的。一般人都認為艾滋病是通過性和血液傳播的，感染艾滋病可能和患者的道德品質和生活作風有關，容易使人對患者的道德品質和生活作風產生負面評價，對人的名譽影響極大。就像《華商報》所報導的：
一張艾滋病檢測報告足以改變一個人的生活，改變了西安市民馮戰強的生活。患有艾滋病的消息仍在社會上不脛而走，大家見了他像躲瘟疫一樣唯恐避之不及。這兩年多，馮戰強都不知道自己是怎麼混過來的，“每天躺在床上，也沒個人說話，我就想得了艾滋病會咋死……”就這樣，馮戰強無辜當了兩年半的艾滋病人，不能正常工作、生活，飽受各種壓力……
本案中，原告馮戰強請求的精神損害撫慰金是50000元，一審判賠20000元，二審調解支付經濟補助金24000元。對於一、二審的賠償數額，原告馮戰強均無異議，願意接受。
只是，此款能彌補馮戰強所遭受的巨大精神損害嗎？
為什麼不能按原告的請求判賠50000元精神損害賠償金呢？
關於精神損害賠償數額的確定標準，在我國現行法律中沒有明確規定，2010年7月1日即將實行的《中華人民共和國侵權責任法》中亦未規定。司法實踐中主要是賦予法官自由裁量的權力。所以往往出現了不僅是不同法院，就是同一法院不同法官在受理同類案件時，其結果都不一致。而且從此類案件的審判結果來看，我國目前普遍存在判決賠償數額過低與當事人的訴訟請求懸殊的問題。為了提高法律的可操作性，一些地區通過地方性規定，根據本地區經濟發展水平，制定出了當地精神損害賠償數額的限額，如重慶市高級人民法院對轄區內精神損害賠償案件賠償標準作出最高限額10萬元的規定；廣州市人大曾確定精神賠償數額為5萬元的下限；上海市高級人民法院曾確定5萬元的上限。這種對精神賠償確定數額限制的做法是否可取？法律界人士說法不一。
反對者認為，規定一個上下限是不科學的，尤其是上限。因為精神賠償主要作用是撫慰受害方，規定上限，等於封頂了，這樣難免使一些被損害程度小的人得到多的賠償，而損害大的人得到少的賠償，這就失去了一個公平的氛圍。精神損害賠償具有補償性、撫慰性、懲罰性的特徵，應該根據對方的賠付能力、被害人的損害程度、在社會上引起的社會效果等不同情況來綜合考慮賠償數額。就本案來說，為更好地體現精神損害賠償的功能，應該按原告的訴請數額50000判賠精神損害撫慰金。
（三）侵害他人人身權益造成財產損失的，按照被侵權人因此受到的損失賠償
本案一審，原告馮戰強除了提出恢復名譽、消除影響、賠禮道歉並賠償精神損失費50000元兩項訴請外，還有兩項訴請，即：賠償房租損失50000元；賠償誤工費39000元。理由是：由於被告的誤檢，他背了個艾滋病的名聲，人們遠遠地躲著他，在長達兩年半的時間裡飽受折磨，不僅他個人的生活受到影響，無法工作，連家里和哥哥的房子都出租不出去，因此，要求被告賠償房租損失和誤工費。一審以原告未提供被誤診艾滋病與房租、誤工之間存在因果關係，對其主張房租損失、誤工費之訴訟請求不予支持。二審調解是以“經濟補助金”的形式出現，看不出其中是否包含房租損失和誤工費，只從24000元的數額來看，似乎未包含在內，即亦未支持此兩項訴請。
那麼，該不該支持原告的這兩項訴請呢？
1993年8月7日《最高人民法院關於審理名譽權案件若干問題的解答》第十條就規定：“公民、法人因名譽權受到侵害要求賠償的，侵權人應賠償侵權行為造成的經濟損失；公民並提出精神損害賠償要求的，人民法院可根據侵權人的過錯程度、侵權行為的具體情節、給受害人造成精神損害的後果等情況酌定。”
由此可以看出，原告的這兩項訴請具有法律上的依據。
2010年7月1日即將實行的《中華人民共和國侵權責任法》第二十條規定：“侵害他人人身權益造成財產損失的，按照被侵權人因此受到的損失賠償；被侵權人的損失難以確定，侵權人因此獲得利益的，按照其獲得的利益賠償。侵權人因此獲得的利益難以確定，被侵權人和侵權人就賠償數額協商不一致，向人民法院提起訴訟的，由人民法院根據實際情況確定賠償數額。”
此條法律規定，則更加明確了侵害人身權的財產損失計算方法，使之更具可操作性。
楊立新教授在其所著《<中華人民共和國侵權責任法>條文解釋與司法適用》（人民法院出版社2010年1月版）一書第111—112頁對此專門論述：“在司法實踐中應當注意的是，這種人身權損害造成的財產損失，並不是只有生命權、健康權或者身體權，通常這樣的人格權損害造成的財產損失，是通過法定的賠償項目計算方法計算的，當然是按照損失賠償；而侵害生命權、健康權或者身體權，多數侵權人並不因此而獲得利益。因此，人身損害賠償一般不採用本條規定的賠償方法。對於侵害精神性人格權以及身份權等人身權，造成財產損失的，應當按照這樣的辦法進行賠償。那就是，造成財產損失的，財產損失必須予以賠償；如果財產損失難以確定，則按照侵權人因此獲得利益的數額，確定賠償責任。例如，侵害肖像權，侵權人用他人肖像做廣告，獲得財產利益，而被侵權的財產損失不易計算，按照侵權人所獲利益確定賠償責任，方便且易操作，是一個好的辦法。”
綜上，對於原告馮戰強房租損失和誤工費之賠償訴請，一、二審均應酌情考慮，這樣才能彌補其實際經濟損失。
來源： 中國法院網陝西頻道
-
False detection of AIDS-induced damage to the reputation of property to make compensation
Author: Zhai army Release time: 2010-03-18 11:43:54
【Problem】 Tips
False detection caused by an authoritative department, the reputation of AIDS and property damage, how Tam responsibility?
Tips】 【Points
False detection so that others will have been a two and a half people with AIDS, reputation and property losses suffered during the accident departments should not only be liable for violations of the right to honor the spirit of liability for damages, but also because of violations of the right to bear the reputation of the resulting property damage.
【Index】 Case
The first instance: Xi'an Beilin District People's Court (2009) Monument No. 698 China a word beginning (November 2, 2009)
Second instance: Xi'an Intermediate People's Court (2010) West China 2 final word No. 11 (January 8, 2010)
【Case】
The appellant (the trial the defendant) Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Xi'an, home to Xi'an, Xi'an Film Studio Road 65.
Appellee (the trial the plaintiff) Feng Zhan-Qiang, male, February 15, 1976 born, Han nationality, unemployed, living in Xi'an Lianhu District Bu Zi Village, 182.
The trial the defendant Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Shaanxi Province, Xi'an, home to build on the 3rd Street.
Yanta District, Xi'an trial the defendant Disease Control and Prevention Center, home to 345 North Road, Xi'an Cuihua.
November 15, 2005, the plaintiff Zhan-Qiang Feng Xian labor camp because of drug addiction has been one year of corrective labor. By the end of May 2006, Yanta District, Xi'an, re-education facility to help CDC collected blood samples Zhan-Qiang Feng carry out blood tests, after a city of CDC screening for HIV antibody-positive, the provincial Center for Disease Control confirmed remains positive. Provincial CDC on June 9, 2006 issued by the plaintiff Feng Zhan-Qiang HIV antibody-positive reports. In the same year in June, the Urban CDC will be the name of the plaintiff Feng Zhan-Qiang special report published in AIDS network. In August 2008, the plaintiff Zhan-Qiang Feng, Xi'an Hi-tech in a car accident was rushed to hospital for surgery, laboratory tests found no HIV infection. December 9, 2008, from Lianhu District CDC collected blood samples sent to provincial CDC re-testing, the provincial CDC tested No. 08-233 issued a number of HIV antibody test confirmed that the defendant, the report concluded "HIV antibody negative . " Remarks column in the two reports are "only this time the sample is responsible for" message.
February 5, 2009, Shaanxi Province, HIV Testing and Diagnosis Center, CDC sent a letter to the Lianhu District, says: "Yanta District Disease Prevention and Control Center by the end of May 2006 to assist in Xi'an labor camp Mr. Feng Zhanjiang collected blood samples, initial review evacuation center confirmed positive, I still positive. December 9, 2008 Feng Zhan-Qiang due to other reasons, from Lianhu District CDC collected blood samples sent to our center once again test for HIV antibody negative. cause after the yin-yang situation in the former there are four: First, a mistake for banning blood samples, and second, for inspection of contaminated blood, three laboratory errors, the emergence of AIDS in four "elite" phenomenon (the first confirmed positive and then overcast - the author note). Analysis of Feng Zhan-Qiang after the first blood sample a variety of reagents, a number of units screened positive were confirmed, I think that this center blood samples had been contaminated and the possibility of wrongful convictions big. In this regard, three disease control system Feng Zhan-Qiang apologize. while Fung not infected with HIV was pleased and give congratulations. We also sincerely hope Mr Fung acquire more knowledge of AIDS prevention and refused to AIDS virus in vitro.
After the China Daily on February 6, 2009 entitled "mistaken him for two years and a half when people with AIDS," February 13, 2009 entitled "AIDS in provinces, municipalities and three disease control Misdiagnosis apology" to this took place.
The plaintiff to the defendant because of the false detection, to the spirit of self-inflicted tremendous damage and economic losses, sued three defendants: 1, rehabilitated, and eliminate adverse effects and an apology; 2, compensation for loss of rent 50,000 yuan; 3, 39,000 yuan compensation for loss of working time fee ; 4, compensation for mental damages, 50,000 yuan; 5, litigation costs from the defendant.
Three each in its own no-fault grounds that the defendants do not agree with the plaintiff's claim.
【Trial】
Court of First Instance that the citizens have the right to reputation. In line with the defendant, Yanta District, Xi'an, CDC being re-education labor camp staff blood tests, the plaintiff's blood sample by the city of CDC screening positive for HIV antibodies, the provincial CDC gave blood samples for HIV antibody censorship positive report, the City CDC is not carefully handled, but will the plaintiff named the special report published in the AIDS network, there is a certain fault. To bring the invisible to the plaintiff emotional distress. City, CDC should take the plaintiff to bring the spirit of the resulting loss. Yanta District, CDC is responsible only for collecting blood samples, not made to confirm the report, the provincial CDC censorship only blood, but to the person in charge has been collected, it should not bear the liability in tort. Provincial AIDS Detection and Diagnosis Center, sent a letter Lianhu District CDC, said the three disease control systems Feng Zhan-Qiang apologize. The plaintiff requested the defendant is the rehabilitation of three, eliminating the impact and an apology, because the plaintiff city, the name will be published in the CDC AIDS special intelligence network, it should restore the reputation of the plaintiff city of CDC to eliminate the impact and an apology. City CDC lost the spirit of Feng Zhan-Qiang bear the corresponding liability. The plaintiff claims lost rent, lost income, costs of the claim, its failure to provide the misdiagnosis of AIDS and rent, a causal relationship between loss of working time, the Court did not support its claims. Accordingly, in accordance with "The People's Republic of China Civil Code," Article V, Article 1, 120th Article 134th of Supreme People's Court on the implementation of "The People's Republic of China General Principles of Civil views of a number of issues" section 150, the Supreme Court "to hear defamation cases on the interpretation of a number of issues," the provisions of Article VIII, the verdict is as follows:
First, the effective date of this decision within thirty days, Xi'an Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the rehabilitation of the plaintiff Feng Zhan-Qiang, eliminating the impact of an apology (an apology to the court approved the contents of date).
Second, the effective date of this decision within thirty days, the defendant in Xi'an Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the plaintiff compensation for the spirit of Feng Zhan-Qiang solatium 20,000.
If this decision fails to fulfill a specified period, the obligation to pay money, it should be in accordance with the "PRC Civil Procedure Law," the provisions of Article 229th, double payment of interest on the debt during the delay in performance.
4, dismissed the plaintiff Feng Zhan-Qiang asked three defendants to pay compensation of 50,000 yuan rent loss claim.
5, dismissed the plaintiff Feng Zhan-Qiang asked three defendants to pay compensation of 39,000 yuan loss of working time fee claim.
Litigation costs 3212 yuan, the plaintiff the burden of 1,500 yuan, Xi'an Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the burden of 1712 yuan (Cikuan the plaintiff had paid in advance, the defendant after the commencement of this decision to pay the plaintiff directly).
After the announcement, Xi'an Center for Disease Control and Prevention dissatisfied, appeal. Presided over by the Xi'an Intermediate People's Court, the parties voluntarily agree as follows:
Bookmark this mediation closed the day of Disease Prevention and Control Center, Xi'an, Shaanxi Provincial Disease Prevention and Control Center, Xi'an Yanta District, Center for Disease Control and Prevention each to pay 8,000 yuan Feng Zhan-Qiang economic subsidy.
This case no other claim.
First instance, costs 3212 yuan (Feng Zhan-Qiang has been prepaid 1606 yuan), from the burden of 1606 yuan Feng Zhan-Qiang, Xi'an Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the burden of 1606 yuan; second instance, costs 300 yuan (150 is charged for half million) from the Xi'an Center for Disease Control and Prevention assume 150.
【Comment】
First, tort compensation, Tam responsible for one side or the tripartite Tam responsibility?
Authority for HIV testing due to false detection unit of the von battle against AIDS, a strong reputation of the right one, it should be non-controversial. Tam is responsible for the Who? Of Feng Zhan-Qiang, no matter in which part of the problem, because it is wrong disease control department, should pay damages, public apology, but also his innocence, to make their own lead a normal life.
The first trial found the plaintiff because of city names will be published in the CDC AIDS special intelligence network, it should be City CDC should restore the reputation of the plaintiff to eliminate the impact of an apology, the spirit of the loss of Feng Zhan-Qiang bear the corresponding liability. The second trial has been replaced by the provincial urban areas of all three to pay CDC Feng Zhan-Qiang 8,000 yuan of economic benefits, although there is no rehabilitation, to eliminate the impact of the terms of an apology, and the moral damage solatium will change into "economic benefits", is actually shared by the three parties of the infringement liability.
HIV Testing and Diagnosis Center of Shaanxi Province to the CDC sent a letter Lianhu District, said: "Analysis of Feng Zhan-Qiang first blood through a variety of reagents, a number of units screened positive were confirmed, I think that this center contaminated blood samples high probability of miscarriage of justice. In this regard, three disease control system Feng Zhan-Qiang apology. "Accordingly, the party seems to be blood Yanta District Disease Prevention and Control Center's responsibility. But the broad merits of the case point of view, provinces, municipalities, three CDC wrapped in a shroud to account. Because:
1, in judicial practice, medical negligence, belonging to a fault. Parties to determine whether a specific medical negligence, medical treatment should be done objectively on the side is the duty of care as the standard to require physician during medical practices, their knowledge, diligence, technology, and the attitude of the medical profession should be in line with general standards of doctors in the under the same circumstances, the criteria to be followed. Doctors are therefore engaged in treatment, the effect of lazy perform in accordance with the standard of their share of the duty of care to a person to physical or health impairment, namely, should be identified as at fault. This standard also applies to disease prevention and control institutions. This case, Feng Zhan-Qiang be mistaken for review as the reason why people with AIDS, one blood sample submission made a mistake, and second, for inspection of contaminated blood, three laboratory errors, the emergence of AIDS in four "elite" phenomenon. Detection unit can not prove that Feng Zhan-Qiang is AIDS "elite" phenomenon, can only be part of the former three cases, the plaintiff Feng Zhan-Qiang to three CDC there is ground fault tort claim is in line with the law.
2, as the authority of the AIDS testing unit, the defendant should be aware that an HIV test report be enough to change a person's normal life path, and made to suffer great mental pain and suffering. Of Feng Zhan-Qiang was diagnosed with HIV after transfection, test units should take into account the possibility of misdiagnosis, it should take into account the spread of this news will adversely affect the plaintiff. But the test units do not review, before reaching a final conclusion, we notify the relevant personnel, and the Internet, caused damage to the reputation of Zhan-Qiang Feng, This is also a kind of fault.
(B) With regard to moral damages in the amount of solatium
As of today, AIDS remains a fatal disease, we have no way to resolve it. The fear of AIDS, discrimination is still widespread. Most people think that AIDS is transmitted through sexual and blood, in patients with AIDS may be the moral quality and life style related, easily make the patient's moral character and life style have a negative evaluation, a great impact on the person's reputation. Like "China Daily" reported:
An HIV test report be enough to change a person's life has changed Xian Feng Zhan-Qiang people's lives. Suffering from AIDS, the news spread like wildfire are still in society, we met with him like a dodge to avoid like the plague for fear of the less. This is more than two years, Feng Zhan-Qiang do not know how they are mixed over it, "a day in bed, there is no personal remarks, I wanted to suffer from AIDS will gnaw die ... ..." So, Feng Zhan-Qiang innocent as a two and a half AIDS, does not work, life, suffering from all kinds of pressure ... ...
This case, the plaintiff requested the spirit of Feng Zhan-Qiang damages solatium was 50,000 yuan, 20,000 yuan a judgment first trial, second trial mediation 24000RMB pay economic benefits. For a second trial, the amount of compensation, the plaintiffs have raised no objections Zhan-Qiang Feng, willing to accept.
Only that this section can make up for Feng Zhan-Qiang moral damage suffered by the great do?
Why can not according to the plaintiff's request for a judgment 50,000 yuan compensation for moral damage it?
On mental criteria for determining the amount of damages, in our current law is not clearly defined, July 1, 2010 be implemented soon, "The People's Republic of China Tort Liability Act" has not provided. Judicial practice, it is mainly to give judges discretionary power. So often there are not only different courts, that is different from the same court judges in similar cases received, the results are inconsistent. And the outcome of the trial of such cases from the point of view, China's current low amount of the award prevailing party's claim with the disparity problem. In order to improve the operability of the law in some areas by local regulations, according to the region's economic development level, to develop the local limit the amount of compensation for moral damage, such as the Chongqing Municipal Higher People's Court on the compensation for moral damage area of the highest standard of compensation cases limit of 100,000 yuan requirements; Guangzhou Municipal People's Congress had to determine the amount of the spirit of the compensation of 5 million threshold; Shanghai Higher People's Court have been OK 5 million ceiling. This kind of spirit to determine the amount of the compensation limit if it is desirable? The legal profession different opinions.
Opponents argue that providing an upper and lower limits is unscientific, especially the ceiling. Because the main role is to comfort the spirit of the compensation the injured party, the provisions of the ceiling, equivalent to cap, and it would not have been the extent of damage to the small number of people who get more compensation for the damage the people who receive less compensation, which has lost a fair atmosphere . Compensatory damages with the spirit, comfort, PUNITIVE, features, payment should be based on each other's ability to damage the victims in the community and other social effects caused by different conditions for comprehensive consideration the amount of compensation. In the case concerned, in order to better reflect the function of compensation for moral damage, it should be according to the amount of the plaintiff's filed for a judgment moral damages solatium 50000.
(C) against the personal rights of others resulting in property losses, according to the infringed person has suffered damages
This case the first trial, the plaintiff Feng Zhan-Qiang In addition to the resumption of honor, to eliminate the impact of an apology, and compensation for mental damages, sue for 50,000 yuan 2, there are two sue, namely: compensation for loss of rent 50,000 yuan; compensation for loss of working time costs 39,000 yuan. The reason is: Because the defendant's false detection, he was carrying the reputation of AIDS, it is far dodging him, as long as two and a half of the time tormented, not only his personal life be affected, unable to work, even the both at home and at her brother's house is not rented out, therefore, require defendants to pay compensation loss and loss of working time rent payments. First instance of the plaintiff did not provide was misdiagnosed AIDS and rent, a causal relationship between loss of working time to his opinions and rent loss, loss of working expenses of the litigation did not support the request. Mediation is a second instance, "economic benefits" of the form, do not see whether the rent includes loss and loss of working time charges, the amount of only from 24000RMB, it seems that is not included, that is not yet in support of both file for.
Then the support of the plaintiff should sue these two do?
August 7, 1993, "Supreme People's Court to hear defamation cases on a number of questions answered," with Article X provides: "Citizens, legal persons and violations of the right of honor claims, the infringer shall compensate the economic losses caused by violations; citizens and to make moral damage compensation claims, the people's court according to the fault of the infringer to the extent of violations of the specific circumstances, the spirit of the damage caused to the victims of the consequences of discretion. "
It can be seen that these two plaintiffs filed for a legal basis.
July 1, 2010 be implemented soon, "The People's Republic of China Tort Liability Act," Diershitiao states: "infringes upon personal rights and interests resulting in property losses, according to the infringed person has suffered damages; been infringed person's loss is difficult to determine, the infringer earned interest, in accordance with the interests of their access to compensation. infringer to obtain a benefit is difficult to determine who has been infringed and the infringement in consultation on the inconsistencies in the amount of compensation to the people's court proceedings, and by the people's court to determine the compensation according to the actual situation the amount. "
This article law, it is even more clear violations of personal rights of property loss calculation method to make it more operational.
Professor Yang Lixin in their book "" The People's Republic of China Tort Liability Law "provisions of the interpretation and application of justice" (People's Publishing House in January 2010 edition) section 111-112 of this book is devoted to: "In the judicial practice of It should be noted that such personal rights and property damage caused by the loss, not only the right to life, health or physical power, moral rights such as the damage is usually caused by property damage, compensation for the project through the statutory calculation method, of course, In accordance with damages; while violations of the right to life, health or physical power, the majority of the infringer does not benefit thereby. Thus, personal injury compensation generally do not use this provision of the compensation. for the spirit of personality rights against the right to personal rights and identity , resulting in property damage, it shall pay compensation in accordance with such an approach. That is, causing property damage, property damage must be compensated; if the loss of property is difficult to determine, in conformity with the infringer, therefore the amount of benefit to determine liability. For example, against the personality right, the infringer to use another portrait of advertising, access to property interests, and has been infringed property damage not easy to calculate, in accordance with the interests of the infringer received to determine liability, convenient and easy to operate, is a good way. "
To sum up, for the plaintiff Feng Zhan-Qiang rent losses and sue for compensation for loss of working time fee, a second instance shall consider, where appropriate, so as to compensate for their actual economic losses.
Source: Shaanxi, China Court Net Channel
|
