产品自身损害救济模式之选择

发布时间：2018-03-28 12:06

本文选题：产品自身损害　切入点：纯粹经济损失　出处：《武汉大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：产品自身损害,是指有瑕疵的产品在交付或移转所有权之后,潜伏于产品某个部位的瑕疵不幸实现,而导致产品不堪使用、毁损或者灭失的情形。关于产品自身损害应如何救济,无论在域外法国家,还是在我国理论和司法实践中,都是一个颇具争议的法律问题。对于产品自身损害,在域外法国家,原则上不允许通过侵权法进行救济,而将其交由合同法调整,确立了"侵权法排除规则+合同法救济"的一般模式。但受制于合同相对性和诉讼时效等因素,完全交由合同法救济可能不利于消费者(受害人)保护。针对于此,有些国家尝试侵权法的例外保护,有些国家则通过突破合同相对性来完善合同法救济。我国理论界大致有三种观点:合同法救济模式、侵权法救济模式和消费者保护法救济模式。合同法救济模式主要着眼于合同法与侵权法的体系协调性,侵权法救济模式和消费者保护法救济模式则祭出消费者(受害人)保护的"大旗",重点着眼于对受害人提供实质上的救济。在技术性规则上,如合同相对性、请求权竞合和诉讼时效,三种模式的认识亦有差异。在司法裁判中,理论界的三种模式也都各有其"拥趸",其中侵权法救济模式在实务中占据主导地位,尤其在《侵权责任法》施行后。比较法上,合同相对性和诉讼时效等技术性规则因素,是域外法国家绕过合同法而借道侵权法救济产品自身损害的主要原因。而在我国,诉讼时效和请求权竞合并非合同法救济模式适用的障碍,但合同相对性确是其短板,而相较之下,侵权法救济模式和消费者保护法救济模式在解决合同相对性问题上具有优势。然而,后两种模式所解决的问题不比产生的问题多,其或在理论上存在诸多缺陷,或与现行制度难以兼容。司法裁判中,虽然侵权法救济的观点占主导地位,消费者保护法救济的观点亦不乏支持者,但其裁判理由存在各种谬误,法律适用错误,不足以成为证明其合理性的依据。我国应恪守合同法救济模式,产品自身损害是履行利益的损失,实质是合同瑕疵履行的问题,应由合同法规范。合同相对性问题可通过生产者担保规则的构建得到解决,无需借道侵权法或消费者保护法进行突破。合同法救济模式能够在实现合同法与侵权法体系协调性的同时,兼顾对消费者(受害人)的保护。
[Abstract]:The damage of the product itself means that the defective product, after delivery or transfer of ownership, is unfortunately realized in a certain part of the product, resulting in the product being unusable. How to remedy the damage caused by the product itself is a controversial legal issue both in the countries of extraterritorial law and in the theory and judicial practice of our country. For the damage of the product itself, in the country of extraterritorial law, In principle, it is not allowed to carry out relief through tort law, but to be adjusted by contract law, which establishes the general mode of "remedy of tort law excluding rules of contract", but is subject to the factors such as the relativity of contract and the limitation of action, etc. Giving full relief to contract law may be detrimental to consumer (victim) protection. In view of this, some countries try to provide exceptional protection under tort law. Some countries improve the remedy of contract law by breaking through the relativity of contract. The relief mode of tort law and the relief mode of consumer protection law are mainly focused on the coordination of the system of contract law and tort law. The relief mode of tort law and the relief mode of consumer protection law sacrifice the "banner" of consumer (victim) protection, with emphasis on providing substantive relief to the victim... in terms of technical rules, such as the relativity of contract, There are also differences in the understanding of the three modes of concurrence of claims and limitation of action. In the judicial adjudication, each of the three modes of theory has its own "supporters", among which the relief mode of tort law occupies a dominant position in practice. Especially after the implementation of the Tort liability Law. In comparative law, technical rules such as relativity of contract and limitation of action are the main reasons for extraterritorial French to circumvent the contract law and remedy the damage of their own products by way of tort law. The limitation of action and the competing right of claim are not the obstacles to the application of the relief mode of contract law, but the relativity of contract is its short board. The relief mode of tort law and the relief mode of consumer protection law have advantages in solving the problem of relativity of contract. However, the problems solved by the latter two models are not more than those produced, and there are many defects in theory. Or it is difficult to be compatible with the current system. In judicial adjudication, although the viewpoint of relief of tort law is dominant and the viewpoint of consumer protection law is not without supporters, there are various fallacies and errors in the application of the law. Our country should abide by the relief mode of contract law, the damage of the product itself is the loss of the benefit of performance, and the essence is the problem of the performance of the contract defect. It should be regulated by contract law. The problem of relativity of contract can be solved through the construction of producer guarantee rules. There is no need to break through the tort law or consumer protection law. The relief mode of contract law can realize the harmony between contract law and tort law system, and at the same time, the protection of consumers (victims) can be taken into account.
【学位授予单位】：武汉大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923;D922.294

【参考文献】