Why did the court reject the application for real estate companies?(The case in the case)

[Case] ​​Li is an owner of a real estate. Due to the dissatisfaction of the quality of the house, Li published 10 articles involving the real estate company through his personal self -media account. Later, the real estate company filed a lawsuit against the court on the grounds of infringing his reputation. In the lawsuit, the above 10 articles were deleted by the media platform. Since then, Li has published a number of articles through self -media accounts, mainly the description of his house purchase and the subjective experience of real estate. The real estate company shall violate the court's personnel right to infringe on the personnel, and requests the court to ban Li from publish an article that violates the reputation of the company on the self -media platform.

According to the court, Li's article reflects Li's negative evaluation of the quality of real estate and his dissatisfaction with a real estate company. Real estate companies should tolerate this. From the perspective of the number of articles, because the article involved in the case is mainly published through Li's self -media account, the scope of the articles published by Li Mou has limited influence.

In addition, the existing evidence is not enough to prove that Li has the possibility of infringing the reputation of the real estate company, and Li's behavior is not realistic. If a ban is made, Li will seriously restrict Li's right to comment on real estate developers as a buyer, which will lead to imbalance between the interests between the two parties, and trigger the real estate developer's use of personality rights to infringe the bans to prevent buyers from publishing the bad demonstration effects of relevant remarks. The court ruled that the application for the real estate company's ban was rejected.

[Said] The judge stated that according to the relevant provisions of the Civil Code, the legal person also enjoys personality rights. The real estate company through the right to infringe on the personnel of the personnel to protect the reputation of the reputation belongs to the personality rights that they enjoy in accordance with the law. However, the response of personality violations emphasizes the urgency, severity, irreplaceability, and irreversibility of damage. It is often a targeting serious infringement that causes irreparable major losses once it occurs. At the same time, whether the ban can be made, whether the applicant's personality rights and the basic rights of others can be balanced and protected, for this reason, we need to consider many factors such as the identity of the parties, the purpose, method and consequences of the behavior, and the necessity of the ban. The ruling of this case fully considered the above points and protected the legitimate rights and interests of the two parties.

The judge reminded that civil subjects have the right to speak through the Internet, but they cannot surpass the boundaries stipulated in the law. The operator has the right to safeguard his own reputation in accordance with the law, but he should respect the right of consumers to make reasonable evaluation of products or services; consumers should also be based on objective reality in the process of describing their own shopping experience and publishing evaluation. Malicious slander.

(Our reporter Sai Yukun sorted out)

"People's Daily" (18th edition, September 29, 2022)

Source: People's Daily -People's Daily

Disclaimer: Reproduced this article out of the purpose of passing more information and conducive to the law of law. If there is an error or violation of the source

- END -