Original title: the single woman spent 380000 Yuan to seek a son overseas
The result was too unexpected
The single woman Xiao Chen was eager to seek a son and successively paid 380000 Yuan to the intermediary agency to buy a full set of overseas surrogacy services
Unexpectedly, the surrogacy failed, but the intermediary agency refused to return the money
Xiao Chen had no choice but to take the intermediary agency to court
On the 9th, the reporter learned from the Nansha Free Trade Zone court in Guangzhou, Guangdong that the court recently concluded a dispute related to surrogacy
Xiao Chen, who has spent 380000 Yuan to provide a full set of overseas surrogate services, is over 30 years old and is not married, but is eager to have his own baby
Xiao Chen claimed that in June, 2018, he learned from a friend that a Thai Overseas Medical Tourism Group Co
, Ltd
(hereinafter referred to as "a Thai institution") registered in Hong Kong was specialized in IVF and surrogacy services in China
In january2019, the two sides signed a contract
A Thai institution promised to provide better hospitals and doctor resources in Thailand for IVF and overall surrogacy services
Xiao Chen also requires that the sperm provided by the surrogate institution meet the following conditions: Asian male, handsome in appearance, no less than 175 in height, not fat, smart, highly educated, healthy, and clearly requires that the fetus be male
In February, 2019, a Thai institution arranged Xiao Chen to go to Thailand for drainage promotion surgery, successfully obtained four normally developing follicles, and told him that he met the requirements of transplant surrogacy
Three months after Xiao Chen returned to China, a Thai institution informed him that the transfer of the surrogate mother failed
For such a result, Xiao Chen said that it was difficult to accept and asked a Thai institution to refund the fee in full, but the two sides failed to reach an agreement after many negotiations
In August, 2019, Xiao Chen took a Thai institution to court
Xiao Chen believes that she has invested nearly two months' time, money and emotional costs in order to ensure the success of the surrogacy
Now that the surrogacy has failed, she should not bear all the losses alone
She requires a Thai institution to return 380000 Yuan
The surrogacy failed
The agency said that it had provided equivalent services and refused to return the fees
Facing the complaint, a Thai Agency said that the agreement signed between the agency and Xiao Chen agreed that it would provide services such as Thai medical information, travel arrangements, living meals, etc
to Xiao Chen
The agreement was signed by the two sides on the principle of voluntariness and equality after full consultation
The behavior of a Thai Agency did not violate the mandatory effectiveness provisions of laws and regulations
During the performance of the contract, the agency provided Xiao Chen with services of equal value and should not be liable for the return of money
Xiao Chen's request for the return of 380000 Yuan has no factual and legal basis
A Thai institution also stressed that the institution only provides services such as Thai medical information, itinerary arrangement, living food and translation, and is not an institution specialized in test tube baby and surrogacy services
Xiao Chen's visit to Thailand for test tube baby surgery is her own choice
The institution is only responsible for helping her select hospitals and doctors, and providing services such as doctor appointment, translation and life
Moreover, the agency did not guarantee that Xiao Chen would be able to transplant surrogacy normally, and could not guarantee the medical effect
Therefore, it should not bear the responsibility for the failure of surrogacy
The court ruled that the contract was invalid
Both parties were at fault
The intermediary returned 160000 yuan
The court of Nansha free trade zone held that although there was no explicit provision in the contract signed between a Thai institution and Xiao Chen to provide surrogacy services, the medical information travel arrangement, food and beverage, translation, medical institution appointment and medical escort services provided by a Thai institution were all ancillary commercial services based on surrogacy, In combination with the behavior of a Thai institution to select and pay the fees of sperm donation service personnel for Xiao Chen in Thailand, and to pay the maternal costs of surrogacy in Cambodia, it can be determined that the two parties signed a contract on surrogacy matters
The Thai overseas medical translation service agreement involved in the case is an intermediary contract for providing surrogacy services signed between an intermediary and a entrusted surrogate
The court held that article 3 of the measures for human assisted reproductive technology stipulates that "the application of human assisted reproductive technology shall be carried out in medical institutions for medical purposes and in line with domestic family planning policies, ethical principles and relevant legal provisions
It is prohibited to buy or sell gametes, zygotes and embryos in any form
Medical institutions and medical personnel shall not implement any form of surrogacy technology
" The above-mentioned contract behavior of a Thai institution is a contract that covers up the illegal purpose in a legal form, violates public order and good customs, and damages the social and public interests, so it should be recognized as invalid
A Thai Agency that provides intermediary services for overseas surrogacy has made a major fault in invalidating the contract involved, while Xiao Chen, knowing that surrogacy violates China's laws and public order and good customs, still signs the contract involved with a Thai Agency and accepts relevant services, also has a fault
Accordingly, both parties shall bear corresponding liabilities according to their respective faults
Finally, based on the evidence provided by both parties, considering that a Thai institution did provide Xiao Chen with accommodation, catering, pick-up, translation, relevant medical guidance and other services during his visit to Thailand, the court decided that a Thai institution would return 160000 yuan to Xiao Chen after deducting the cost of providing relevant services for Xiao Chen, and rejected Xiao Chen's other claims
According to the judge, surrogacy is expressly prohibited, and the circumstances are serious enough to constitute a crime
Cuijian, the presiding judge of the case, told the reporter that surrogacy violates the laws of natural reproduction, which may not only endanger the health of relevant personnel, but also relate to legal, ethical and moral problems such as the establishment of the kinship relationship between the surrogate, the entrusted surrogate and the children born by the surrogate, the determination of the upbringing relationship, which violates public order and good customs and damages the social and public interests, Therefore, it is expressly prohibited, and our law does not allow any institution to seek commercial interests by engaging in surrogacy services
Cui Jian reminded that the general public and relevant medical service institutions must strictly abide by China's fertility laws and regulations, and do not credulously trust the so-called "overseas surrogate" services in order to circumvent China's prohibitive regulations
Otherwise, they may not only suffer serious economic losses but also lose legal protection
If the circumstances are serious, relevant institutions and personnel may also constitute a crime and be subject to corresponding criminal punishment
Source: Guangzhou Daily (id:guangzhou daily) editor: fanjinshi? Checked by: Zhang Ying responsible editor: Zhao Wei on duty editor in chief: Yu Lingbo
