石鼓化工经营部诉富华、程力公司产品损害赔偿案评析

发布时间：2018-04-09 11:00

本文选题：产品自损　切入点：侵权责任说　出处：《湖南大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：社会不断发展，，高度发达的科技支撑下的产品价值也越来越大，产品自身损失的赔偿对当事人的意义不容小觑。而法律法规对于解决这类案件的指导作用却越发滞后，关于产品责任的法律法规相互之间规定的不一，对于现实中所产生的产品损害的救济缺乏可操作性，给受害者（消费者）和法官在实际的司法过程中造成了困扰。在衡阳石鼓化工部诉湖北富华汽车公司、程力汽车公司产品损害赔偿一案中，原告化工经营部买卖罐体车的合同是一个连环合同，先与销售者签订合同，再由销售者与生产者签订合同。由于被告富华公司交付的罐体车存在缺陷，导致原告在运营过程中产生一系列损失，其中最主要的就是罐体车的自身损失以及货物的损失，原告就这些损失起诉了销售者和生产者，一审法院认为，销售者和生产者的责任属于竞合，释明原告就生产者提起侵权之诉，仅起诉生产者，原告遂撤消了对销售者的起诉。当事人双方对于案件的争议焦点是：原告认为对于两部分损失都要求生产者承担，认为损失是由于生产者交付的罐体车不符合规定而造成的；而被告则认为根据产品质量法的规定，自己无须承担对产品自损的责任。为了界定产品自损的性质，联系了纯粹经济利益损失的内涵，两者在定义的阐述、表现形式和特点上都有重合的地方，据此认定产品自损的性质为契约责任，应当由合同法予以救济。但是，我国当前对于产品自损以及缺陷产品以外的损失和人身损失采用的区别制遭遇我国的请求权竞合时所导致的损害得不到完全赔偿，反思两类损失是否属于请求权竞合，结合请求权竞合的相关规定得出产品自损和他损并非请求权竞合，自损和他损理应的到完全赔偿。但综观我国目前的法律法规，对于产品自损的赔偿缺乏有效的解决方法，通过对学界主张的几种主要的解决方法的利弊权衡，得出了把产品自损纳入到侵权法救济的框架下予以赔偿的结论，这对于法院和受害人都是合理高效的解决办法，我国应当以此为主要内容出台司法解释，完善产品自损案件的审判依据。
[Abstract]:With the continuous development of society, the value of products under the support of highly developed science and technology is also increasing, and the significance of compensation for the loss of products themselves cannot be underestimated.However, the guiding role of laws and regulations in solving such cases is increasingly lagging behind. The laws and regulations on product liability differ from each other, and there is a lack of maneuverability to remedy the product damage caused in reality.For victims (consumers) and judges in the actual judicial process caused trouble.In the case of Hengyang Shigu Chemical Industry Ministry v. Hubei Fuhua Automobile Company, Cheng Li Automobile Company's product damage compensation case, the plaintiff's contract for the purchase and sale of the tank car by the chemical industry management department was a serial contract, and the contract was first signed with the seller.Then the seller and the producer sign the contract.As a result of defects in the tank car delivered by the defendant Fuhua Company, the plaintiff incurred a series of losses in the course of operation, the most important of which was the loss of the tank car itself and the loss of the goods.The plaintiff sued the seller and producer for these losses, and the court of first instance held that the responsibility of the seller and producer belonged to competition, and explained that the plaintiff filed a suit of tort against the producer, only suing the producer, and the plaintiff withdrew the suit against the seller.The dispute between the parties is as follows: the plaintiff holds that the producer should bear both parts of the loss and that the loss is caused by the failure of the tank car delivered by the producer to comply with the regulations;The defendant argued that he was not liable for product damage under the Product quality Act.In order to define the nature of product self-damage and the connotation of pure economic interest loss, both of them have overlap in definition, expression form and characteristics, according to which the nature of product self-damage is regarded as contractual responsibility.Relief should be provided by contract law.However, at present, the system of distinction between the loss and personal loss other than the defective product and the self-damage in our country is not fully compensated for the damage caused by the concurrence of the claim rights in our country, so whether the two kinds of losses belong to the competing right of claim can not be fully compensated.Combined with the relevant provisions of the competing right of claim, it is concluded that the product self-loss and his loss are not competing claims, and the self-damage and his damage should be fully compensated.However, in view of the current laws and regulations of our country, there is a lack of effective solutions to the compensation for self-damage of products. By weighing the advantages and disadvantages of several major solutions advocated by academic circles,The conclusion that the product self-damage should be included in the framework of tort law relief is a reasonable and efficient solution for both the court and the victim. Our country should take this as the main content of the judicial interpretation.Perfect the trial basis of product self-damage cases.
【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

【参考文献】