吴运升康享良与谭家居委会等赔偿纠纷案的评析

发布时间：2018-06-08 03:47

本文选题：工伤赔偿 + 人身损害赔偿　；参考：《湖南大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：吴运升、康响良两原告1988年2月28日在谭家锑矿从事掘进工作被炸伤,2007年2月7日原告以劳动争议(工伤赔偿)纠纷为由,向冷水江市人民法院提起诉讼,要求被告支付拖欠的工资、伤残赔偿金、精神损害赔偿金50余万元。2008年1月10日,冷水江市人民法院作出民事判决：驳回两原告赔偿诉讼请求。判决书发生法律效力后,吴运升、康响良以不服判决为由向检察机关申诉,娄底市中级人民法院决定将该案提审,后裁定撤销一审生效判决；发回重审。冷水江法院在重审该案时,将该案分成劳务合同纠纷及人身损害赔偿中特殊类别——雇员受害赔偿纠纷两案分别审理。重审一审判决被告赔偿原告吴运升残疾赔偿金、护理费、鉴定费、被抚养人生活费93225元,赔偿原告康响良残疾赔偿金、鉴定费23308元；此案例前后两次审理的结果,产生了鲜明的对比,原审中原告没有得到一分钱的赔偿,在再审程序中,原告变更案由和诉讼请求,得到了10万余元的补偿,原审和重审结果相差巨大。本案例反映出工伤赔偿与人身损害赔偿竞合、诉讼时效是否过期、赔偿内容和模式等方面的问题,工伤赔偿与人身损害赔偿是有区别的,当前理论界处理竞合有不同模式,司法实践中对于竞合亦有不同的处理方法,其根本原因在于工伤赔偿与人身损害赔偿竞合相关立法缺失,因此,必须完善立法,以协调社会保障制度与民事赔偿制度,使受害人的权利真正得到保护。
[Abstract]:Wu Yunsheng, Kang Xiangliang, two plaintiffs, were injured in the excavation work of Tan Jia antimony Mine on February 28, 1988. On February 7, 2007, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit with the people's Court of Lengshuijiang City on the grounds of labor dispute (industrial injury compensation) dispute. On January 10, 2008, the people's Court of Lengshuijiang City made a civil judgment: to reject the two plaintiffs' claims for compensation. After the legal effect of the judgment, Wu Yunsheng and Kang Xiangliang appealed to the procuratorial organs on the grounds of disagreeing with the judgment. The Loudi Intermediate people's Court decided to arraigne the case, and then ruled that the effective judgment of the first instance should be revoked; When the court of Lengshuijiang retried the case, it was divided into two cases: the dispute of labor contract and the dispute of compensation for personal injury. The defendant was awarded compensation for the plaintiff Wu Yunsheng's disability compensation, nursing fee, appraisal fee, dependant's living expenses of 93225 yuan, and compensation for the plaintiff Kang Xiangliang's disability compensation of 23308 yuan. The result of the two trials before and after this case, In sharp contrast, the plaintiff did not receive a penny of compensation in the original trial. In the retrial procedure, the plaintiff changed the cause of the case and the suit request and received more than 100000 yuan of compensation. The difference between the original trial and the retrial result is huge. This case reflects that the compensation for injury at work and the compensation for personal injury are competing, whether the limitation of action is expired, the content and mode of compensation for compensation, and so on, are different from the compensation for personal injury. At present, there are different modes of handling competition and cooperation in the theoretical circle, and there are different ways of dealing with competition and cooperation in judicial practice. The fundamental reason lies in the lack of legislation related to the competition of compensation for injury at work and compensation for personal injury. Therefore, it is necessary to perfect the legislation. In order to coordinate the social security system with the civil compensation system, the victims' rights can be really protected.
【学位授予单位】：湖南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D920.5;D922.5

【参考文献】