
南投曾姓師太希望收養鄰居14歲兒子以取得原住民保留地承租資格並解決晚年送終問題,但法院認為雙方關係僅屬親友互助,尚未形成實質親子情感,遂依民法規定駁回收養聲請,強調收養必須符合年齡及親屬關係限制,並以建立真實親子關係為核心。
AI-generated summary
民法對收養有嚴格規定,包括收養者必須比被收養者年長二十歲以上,以及特定親屬間因輩分不相等而禁止收養,以防止家族關係混亂。
◎ 法操司想傳媒
想要收養誰都可以嗎,收養會對身分關係產生重大變化,民法對收養有一系列的規定,所以不是想收養誰都可以。
民法對收養有一系列的規定,所以不是想收養誰都可以。(取自貼文) 近期有則新聞報導指出,南投一名曾姓師太在山區承租原住民保留地興建佛堂修行40多年,因年事漸高,盼未來有人替自己送終,也希望佛堂及土地能由熟識的鄰居一家繼續承租,因此提出收養鄰居14歲兒子的想法。由於原住民保留地承租資格涉及身分及親屬關係,若鄰居的兒子成為養子,雙方即具有法律上的親屬關係,未來較有機會繼續承租土地。
曾婦向法院聲請收養後,法院並未准許。法院認為,收養制度的核心在於建立具有實質意義的親子關係,而不是單純為了取得土地承租資格或解決晚年送終問題。從雙方實際相處情形來看,雖然曾婦平時會照顧鄰居的孩子,彼此關係也不錯,但整體情況較像親友間的互助安排,尚不足以認定雙方具有真實、穩固的母子感情。因此,法院最終認為收養目的與制度本旨不符,駁回收養聲請。
收養需要什麼要件?
想要收養一個人,並不是雙方同意就可以,法律對收養者與被收養者之間的年齡及親屬關係都有一定限制。依民法第1073條規定,原則上收養者必須比被收養者年長二十歲以上,也就是說,並非任何人都可以任意成為收養關係中的養父母。不過,如果是夫妻共同收養,夫妻其中一方只要比被收養者年長二十歲以上,另一方年長十六歲以上,也可以成立收養關係。
除了年齡限制外,民法第1073條之1也進一步規定,特定親屬間不能任意成立收養關係。例如,直系血親、直系姻親,以及旁系血親六親等以內、旁系姻親五親等以內,如果彼此的輩分不相當,就不能成立收養關係。這是因為收養制度雖然會產生法律上的親子關係,但也不能因此讓原本的家族輩分產生混亂。
例如,爺爺原則上不能收養自己的孫子,否則孫子在法律上可能同時與原本的父母形成兄弟姊妹等不合理的親屬關係,造成身分及親屬關係上的混亂。
不過,法律也有特別例外。如果是夫妻之一方收養他方的子女,則不受上述輩分限制。例如甲在前一段婚姻中育有子女乙,後來甲與丙結婚,丙就可以依法收養甲的子女乙,形成繼親收養關係。因此,收養並不是「想收養誰都可以」,除了符合年齡要件外,也必須確認雙方的親屬關係及輩分是否符合民法規定,才能合法成立收養關係。
收養關係一旦合法成立,養子女與原生父母間的權利義務原則上即停止,並與養父母發生如同婚生子女的法律關係,除了身分上的親子關係外,也依法享有繼承權。因此,收養並不是單純為了取得特定法律利益的手段,而是以建立實質親子關係為核心。
然而,在這則新聞當中,曾姓師太收養鄰居的兒子,主要是希望藉由收養取得親屬身分,讓對方日後能承租原住民保留地,同時解決自己晚年送終的問題。然而,雙方實際生活及相處模式並未因收養而產生實質改變,收養反而較像是為了解決土地承租及照護問題的權宜安排。
最後法院認為這樣的收養與制度所追求的親子關係並不相符,駁回收養聲請。
本文經授權轉載自法操》【司想評論】師太收養子遭法院拒絕,什麼情況不能收養小孩?

Media personalities Zhou Yukou and Cai Yuzhen were charged with aggravated defamation for publishing Zhang Shujuan's personal information on the program and personal Facebook during the 2022 Taipei mayoral election and referring to her as the heroine of Jiang Xiaoyan's "Jinghua Rolling Bed Case". In the first trial, each was sentenced to 1 year and 6 months in prison. After appeal, the High Court announced today that Zhou Yukou's sentence was reduced to 9 months and Cai Yuzhen's sentence was reduced to 6 months. Zhang Shujuan accused words of causing far-reaching harm, saying that they were like killing people with words.

A wife in Taichung accused her husband of having an extramarital affair with Xiaoyu (pseudonym), and claimed that her husband listed Xiaoyu as the beneficiary of travel insurance and a filial daughter-in-law, and demanded NT$1 million for infringement of her spouse's rights. The husband denied it and produced two agreements signed by his wife agreeing to his affair. The Taichung District Court believed that the relationship between husband and wife existed in name only and that the close relationship could not be proven. It rejected the request and could appeal.

A 50-year-old man from Changhua County has been in jail many times due to his long-term drug abuse and crimes, and failed to fulfill his duties as a father to support his son. After being paralyzed in a car accident, he asked his son to pay for medical expenses, and his son sued to be exempted from the obligation to support him. After hearing the case, the Changhua District Court found that the man had failed to fulfill his support responsibilities for a long time and the circumstances were serious. According to Article 1118-1 of the Civil Code, the son was allowed to be exempted from his support obligations to his father. The whole case is still open to appeal.

India's Supreme Court declared recent Delhi-area rape cases a 'failure of law enforcement' as students protested demanding women's safety after a teenager was gang-raped.

This article explores how China can improve the quality and efficiency of foreign-related legal services, including optimizing the cross-border notarization process, improving the international commercial arbitration mechanism, and strengthening the connection between commercial mediation and justice, to provide legal protection for high-level opening up and the construction of the “One Belt, One Road” initiative.

Death row inmate Huang Linkai was executed by firing squad last year. The Alliance to Abolish the Death Penalty claimed that there were temporary sanctions and retrial procedures at that time, and filed an administrative lawsuit to challenge the Ministry of Justice's approval of the execution as illegal. The Supreme Administrative Court recently rejected the protest and the entire case was confirmed.