Does Unit Punishment Staff'S Improper Words Constitute A Reputation Infringement?

Recently, Gu Xiaoqin, a reader, telephoned the newspaper, because she often had bad habits of eating snacks during her working hours, and occasionally threw away peel, scraps and so on. The company had criticized her for many times.

However, due to the fact that the habit was hard to change, the company gave written warning to her after several criticisms failed, and posted it on the bulletin board of the company.

Because of this decision, the use of the ancient "Xiao Qin" style is "frivolous".

And so on, making some unaware colleagues constantly sarcasm, sarcasm and ridicule.

For a long time, it extends to the society.

For this reason, she was under great psychological pressure and had mental depression and had to be hospitalized.

Recently, she asked the company to bear tort liability, but was refused.

The reason for the company is the interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the trial of the right of reputation. The fourth provision states: "the state organs, social organizations, enterprises and institutions shall decide on the conclusion or disposition of their management personnel, and if the parties concerned bring a lawsuit against the people's court with their right of infringement of reputation, the people's court shall not accept it."

Since the court does not accept it, it does not constitute infringement of reputation right.

Gu Xiaoqin wants to know whether the company's reasons are valid.

The lawyer who accepted the consultation held that the reason of the company was not valid.

The reasons are:

On the one hand, the company's behavior has the constituent elements of infringement of reputation rights.

Although there are corresponding contents in the fourth interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the trial of the right of reputation, it is only for the conclusion or the fact that the decision is based on the fact that it does not cause damage to the employee's reputation. It does not mean that the single person can make use of the false words openly, make improper evaluation and spread, or even vilify the employee's personality and allow his reputation to be damaged.

Because the Supreme People's court hears

The seventh article of the answer to certain questions of the case stipulates: "whether or not it constitutes a liability for infringement of reputation rights should be determined according to the fact that the victim has the reputation of being harmed, the behavior of the perpetrator is illegal, the causal relationship between the illegal act and the damage consequences, and the actor's subjective fault is identified."

And the company's action is exactly the same.

One is that ancient Qin has been taunted, satiried, ridiculed by colleagues and even caused psychological stress, resulting in mental depression. The two is the 101st provision of the general principles of civil law: "citizens and legal persons enjoy the right of reputation, and the dignity of citizens is protected by law, and it is forbidden to damage the reputation of citizens or legal persons by insulting or slander."

Therefore, even if Gu Xiaoqin does exist some improper, but the company can not exaggerate the destruction of her reputation; three, if the company's decision can truly reflect the actions of Gu Qin, Gu Xiao Qin will not suffer such a "treatment"; four, the company should predict the damage to the reputation of the ancient piano before publishing the decision with false content, but the company has not foreseen or neglected because of negligence, and no matter what kind of situation it has shown that it has fault.

On the other hand, the company must undertake

。

The eighth interpretation of the Supreme People's court's interpretation of certain issues concerning the determination of liability for civil tort mental damage compensation stipulates: "because of the mental damage caused by infringement, but without serious consequences, the victim's request for compensation for mental damage is generally not supported. The people's court can, according to circumstances, order the infringer to stop infringement, restore reputation, eliminate the influence and apologize.

Due to the serious mental consequences caused by infringement, the people's court may, in addition to ordering the infringer to bear the civil liability for stopping infringement, restoring reputation, eliminating the influence and apologizing, may be ordered to make compensation for the corresponding mental injury solatium according to the request of the victim.

Because Gu Xiao Qin has already produced the actual cost of medical expenses and so on, which determines that it has the right to require the company to bear corresponding civil liability.

For more information, please pay attention to the world clothing shoes and hats and Internet cafes.