《中华人民共和国民法典》体系下通奸第三者责任的人格权转介路径新释

A New Interpretation of the Path of Referral of Personality Rights On Third Party Liability for Adultery Under the Civil Code System

对于通奸第三者的行为应仅仅受到道德谴责,还是应当受到法律规制,是家事法领域的经典难题。此问题之所以难以回答,不仅因其所依托的教义学路径难以融贯,更因民间之家庭理念与道德观念具有极强的“流动性”与“抽象性”特征。责任否定说在价值层面和技术层面均难谓正当,责任肯定说缺乏相应的社会观念与制度土壤,且在责任评价上对第三者过度苛责。对通奸第三者的规制应当采取有限度承认其责任的“折中模式”,借助《中华人民共和国民法典》第1001条实现身份权利对人格权的参照保护,根据主诉利益是否明确判断通奸第三者的责任承担路径与具体责任形态。

Whether the behaviour of the adulterous third party should be only morally condemned or legally regulated is a classic problem in the field of family law.The reason why this question is difficult to answer is not only because the doctrinal path on which it is interpreted is difficult to be integrated,but also because the folk concept of family and morality has strong characteristics of“fluidity”and“abstraction”.Responsibility denial cannot be justified in the value level and technical level,and responsibility affirmation lack of corresponding social concepts and institutional soil,and in the evaluation of responsibility for the third party is too harsh.The regulation of the third party of adultery should adopt the“compromise mode”of limited recognition of responsibility,with the help of Article 1001 of the Civil Code to achieve the protection of identity rights in reference to the right to personality,according to the interests of the main complaint is clear to judge the third party of adultery to assume the responsibility of the path and the specific form of responsibility.