第三人致旅客伤害案铁路承运人的责任承担研究
发布时间：2019-03-19 21:38
【摘要】：铁路运输具有明显不同于其他运输方式的特点,其所造成的旅客伤害的情形也是多种多样,具有自身独有的特点。比如铁路运输的旅客人数众多,在封闭的车厢里形成一个小社会,旅客有时会遭受第三方侵害的情况,而这个“第三方”的身份却真是多种多样,有的是车厢里的其他旅客,有的是犯罪嫌疑人,有时列车还会遭受外来不明物体的袭击从而造成旅客的伤害。这些第三人致旅客伤害案件作为铁路运输法院专门管辖的案件,历来是审理的难点,判决结果不统一的现象是非常普遍的。就是最高法院的相关司法解释也存在一个观点前后变化的情况,有的规定表面看起来也是相互矛盾。而且,相关侵权法律的规定与我国合同法的相关规定在适用于同一案件中得出的结论有时竟会截然相反。那么在类似的案件中,铁路承运人应该承担何种责任?是安全保障义务中的补充责任还是违反附随义务的违约责任?其法理基础究竟何在?合同法第121条能否适用于本案?对于这些问题,律师、当事人、各个法院的法官都存在着不同的理解和认识,甚至发生了激烈的争论。这直接导致了不同法院、法官审理案情基本相同的案件,裁判结果却相差甚大。裁判标准的不统一损害了司法公信力,影响了社会的和谐稳定。这亟需我们从理论上澄清模糊认识,并秉持诚实信用原则,作出符合法理和人情的解答,以统一司法裁判标准,维护司法的公正和权威。本文主要采用两种研究方法：一是实证分析法。学术界研究民法理论,成果显著,但无论多么深奥的理论,其基础必定是对实践中大量案件的实证性分析。二是法解释学的方法。法律解释的方法有很多,有文义解释、限缩解释、目的解释等等。笔者将尝试运用这些方法对相关法律条文进行解释以得出符合法律精神和常识人情的结论。
[Abstract]:Railway transportation is different from other modes of transportation, and the situation of passenger injury caused by railway transport is varied and has its own unique characteristics. For example, the number of passengers transported by rail is large, and a small society is formed in a closed compartment, in which passengers sometimes suffer from violations by third parties. However, the identity of this "third party" is really varied, and some of them are other passengers in the carriages. Some are suspects, and sometimes trains are attacked by unknown objects from outside the world, causing damage to passengers. As the special jurisdiction of the railway transport court, these cases of third party causing passenger injury have always been difficult to hear, and the result of judgment is not uniform. Even in the Supreme Court's judicial interpretation, there is a change of opinion, some of which appear to contradict each other. Moreover, the stipulations of the relevant tort law and the relevant provisions of the contract law of our country are applied to the same case and the conclusion can sometimes be completely contrary to that of the contract law of our country. So what is the responsibility of the railway carrier in similar cases? Is it the supplementary responsibility in the security obligation or the breach responsibility in breach of the accompanying obligation? What is the legal basis? Can Article 121 of contract Law apply to this case? For these problems, lawyers, litigants, judges of each court have different understanding and understanding, and even have a fierce debate. This directly led to different courts, judges hearing basically the same case, but the outcome of the decision is very different. The inconsistency of adjudicative standard impairs the judicial credibility and affects the harmony and stability of the society. It is urgent for us to clarify the vague understanding in theory and uphold the principle of good faith and to give the answers in accordance with the legal principle and human feelings in order to unify the standard of judicial judgment and safeguard the justice and authority of the administration of justice. This paper mainly adopts two research methods: one is empirical analysis. The academic circle studies the civil law theory, the achievement is remarkable, but no matter how esoteric theory, its foundation must be to the practice of a large number of cases of the empirical analysis. The second is the method of law hermeneutics. There are many methods of legal interpretation, such as textual interpretation, restrictive interpretation, purpose interpretation and so on. The author will try to use these methods to interpret the relevant legal provisions in order to draw a conclusion in line with the spirit of law and common sense.
【学位授予单位】：复旦大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923.6
[Abstract]:Railway transportation is different from other modes of transportation, and the situation of passenger injury caused by railway transport is varied and has its own unique characteristics. For example, the number of passengers transported by rail is large, and a small society is formed in a closed compartment, in which passengers sometimes suffer from violations by third parties. However, the identity of this "third party" is really varied, and some of them are other passengers in the carriages. Some are suspects, and sometimes trains are attacked by unknown objects from outside the world, causing damage to passengers. As the special jurisdiction of the railway transport court, these cases of third party causing passenger injury have always been difficult to hear, and the result of judgment is not uniform. Even in the Supreme Court's judicial interpretation, there is a change of opinion, some of which appear to contradict each other. Moreover, the stipulations of the relevant tort law and the relevant provisions of the contract law of our country are applied to the same case and the conclusion can sometimes be completely contrary to that of the contract law of our country. So what is the responsibility of the railway carrier in similar cases? Is it the supplementary responsibility in the security obligation or the breach responsibility in breach of the accompanying obligation? What is the legal basis? Can Article 121 of contract Law apply to this case? For these problems, lawyers, litigants, judges of each court have different understanding and understanding, and even have a fierce debate. This directly led to different courts, judges hearing basically the same case, but the outcome of the decision is very different. The inconsistency of adjudicative standard impairs the judicial credibility and affects the harmony and stability of the society. It is urgent for us to clarify the vague understanding in theory and uphold the principle of good faith and to give the answers in accordance with the legal principle and human feelings in order to unify the standard of judicial judgment and safeguard the justice and authority of the administration of justice. This paper mainly adopts two research methods: one is empirical analysis. The academic circle studies the civil law theory, the achievement is remarkable, but no matter how esoteric theory, its foundation must be to the practice of a large number of cases of the empirical analysis. The second is the method of law hermeneutics. There are many methods of legal interpretation, such as textual interpretation, restrictive interpretation, purpose interpretation and so on. The author will try to use these methods to interpret the relevant legal provisions in order to draw a conclusion in line with the spirit of law and common sense.
【学位授予单位】：复旦大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923.6
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前8条
1 张影;第三人原因违约及其责任承担[J];北方论丛;2002年06期
2 李颖;;论债务履行辅助人的界定[J];研究生法学;2002年01期
3 叶i吰，
本文编号：2443924
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/hetongqiyue/2443924.html
