旅行社安全保障义务制度研究

发布时间：2018-04-21 03:05

本文选题：旅行社 + 安全保障义务　；参考：《河南大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：随着旅游业的迅猛发展,旅游者的人身安全问题越来越为人们所关注。旅游活动具有内在危险性,法律应当要求旅游活动的主要组织者即旅行社对旅游者的人身安全承担安全保障义务。包价旅游依然是旅游活动中比例最大的旅游方式,旅行社在包价旅游活动中扮演着重要角色。安全保障义务是我国侵权法领域中新的义务类型,旅行社的安全保障义务既集中体现了安全保障义务的性质和特征,又具有自身特有的内涵,在旅游纠纷中涉及到旅行社安全保障义务的问题比比皆是。尽管现有法律法规有所涉及,但多是原则性规定,可操作性较差。因此,旅行社安全保障义务是个值得研究的问题。本文主要分五部分。第一部分通过最高人民法院指导性案例“焦建军案”分析旅行社安全保障义务在实践中存在的问题。首先介绍了旅游者焦建军在旅游过程中发生安全事故,受到人身伤害,因而状告旅行社违反安全保障义务,要求人身损害赔偿的案情。然后指出本案的争议焦点是被告旅行社应承担的安全保障义务是否已经履行。其次,论述了在履行辅助人侵权的情况下,旅行社是否应承担安全保障义务以及如何承担责任。最后,通过本案归纳出关于旅行社安全保障义务在实践中存在的问题。第二部分是关于旅行社安全保障义务的一般理论。包括其内涵、特点、性质、依据、内容。通过以上分析,可以对旅行社的安全保障义务有较为清晰的认识,对上部分所述问题的解决提供理论支持。其中一些理论争议,笔者在前人研究的基础上进行阐述,并提出自己的观点,认为旅行社安全保障义务是安全保障义务在旅游活动中具体表现,两者在法理层面上是一脉相承的。在此基础上结合安全保障义务的理论对其存在的依据及其内容进行了分析论证。第三部分是关于旅行社安全保障义务在实践中存在的三个问题及原因分析。包括旅行社安全保障义务的合理限度问题;不同主体违反安全保障义务时旅行社的责任状态问题;旅行社违反安全保障义务的归责原则问题。认为在分析和解决问题时,不考虑旅行社承担义务的合理限度,苛求旅行社承担无限度的安全保障义务,是不公平的。不同主体引发的责任以及旅行社应当承担何种责任,现行法律法规并未明确,不利于旅游纠纷的解决。《旅游法》明确了旅行社无过错不真正连带责任,这势必加重旅行社的经营风险,对旅行社是否公平,这些问题值得商榷。第四部分是对国外旅行社安全保障义务制度经验的借鉴。主要对德国关于经营者安全保障义务的规定进行分析,并通过案例来说明德国是通过义务转化方式来强化原安全保障义务人的监督义务,而不认同绝对的安全保障义务,同时还应区分违约和侵权不同的责任承担规则。对于日本,可以借鉴其完整的旅游法规体系。针对旅游业相关领域的行业范围、经营活动、行为准则等作出的严格具体的规定,配以实施细则,并根据情况变化适时进行修改。旅行社的分级制对旅行社承担不同程度的安全保障义务提供了依据。第五部分是对旅行社安全保障义务制度的完善建议。包括合理限度的判断,需要分析其承担责任的合理范围和考量的因素。明确不同情况下旅行社不同的责任形态以及建议以过错责任原则作为旅行社违反安全保障义务的归责原则。旅行社的安全保障义务是维护旅游者权益的保障,但并不意味着必须牺牲旅行社的合法权益。厘清旅行社在不同情况下承担何种责任,有利于更好的处理旅游纠纷,维护各个方面的利益。对于无过错责任的适用,立法上应持谨慎态度。以过错责任原则划分责任,可以更好的兼顾旅行社与旅游者双方之间的权益,促进旅游行业的健康发展。
[Abstract]:With the rapid development of tourism, the personal safety of tourists is becoming more and more concerned. Tourism has an inherent risk. The law should require the main organizers of the tourism activities to undertake safety and security obligations to the personal safety of the tourists. The travel agency plays an important role in the package tour activities. The security obligation is a new type of obligation in the field of tort law in China. The safety guarantee obligation of the travel agency not only embodies the nature and characteristics of the security obligation, but also has its own unique connotation, and it involves the problem of the security obligation of the travel agency in the tourism dispute. Although the existing laws and regulations are involved, most of them are principled and poor operable. Therefore, the security obligation of travel agencies is a problem worthy of study. This article is divided into five parts. The first part analyses the security obligation of travel agency in practice through the Jiao Jianjun case of the Supreme People's court's guiding case. The problem. First, this paper introduces the safety accident and personal injury of tourist Jiao Jianjun in the course of tourism, so that the travel agency is accused of violating the security obligation and the case of personal injury compensation. Then it is pointed out that the focus of the dispute is whether the security obligation of the defendant travel agency should be carried out. Secondly, it is discussed. In the case of fulfilling the infringement of the assistant, the travel agency should bear the obligation of security and how to undertake the responsibility. Finally, through this case, the author sums up the problems in the practice of the safety guarantee obligation of the travel agency. The second part is the general theory about the security obligation of the travel agency, including its connotation, characteristics, nature, basis, and the inside. Through the above analysis, we can have a clearer understanding of the safety guarantee obligation of the travel agency and provide theoretical support to the solution of the problems mentioned in the last part. Some of the theoretical disputes, the author of the author, on the basis of the previous research, and the view that the obligation of security guarantee of the travel agency is the obligation of safety and security to travel. The third part is about the three problems and reasons for the security obligation of travel agency in practice, including the security obligations of travel agencies. The problem of reasonable limit; the responsibility state of the travel agency when the different subject violates the security obligation; the travel agency violates the responsibility principle of the security obligation. It is unfair that it does not consider the reasonable limit of the travel agency to bear the obligation when analyzing and solving the problem, and it is unfair to ask the travel agency to bear the unlimited security obligation. The responsibility of the same subject and the responsibility that the travel agency should bear, the current laws and regulations are not clear and not conducive to the settlement of the tourist disputes. The tourism law clearly indicates that the travel agency has no real joint liability without fault, which is bound to aggravate the business risk of the travel agency and the public peace of the travel agency. The fourth part is the state of the country. The experience of the safety guarantee duty system of the foreign travel agency is used as a reference. It mainly analyzes the German regulations on the security obligations of the operators, and shows that Germany is to strengthen the supervision obligation of the original safety and security obligor by means of the transformation of obligations, and does not agree with the absolute security obligation, and should also distinguish between breach of contract and invasion. In Japan, we can learn from its complete system of tourism laws and regulations. According to the strict and specific regulations on the scope of industry, business activities, rules of conduct and so on in the related fields of tourism, the rules and regulations should be carried out in accordance with the detailed rules and according to the changes in the circumstances. The classification system of travel agencies takes different degrees to travel agencies. The fifth part is the basis for the security obligation. The fifth part is the suggestion to improve the security obligation system of the travel agency. It includes the reasonable limits, the reasonable scope of the responsibility and the factors to be considered, the different forms of responsibility of the travel agency under different circumstances and the violation responsibility principle as a violation of the travel agency The liability principle of safety guarantee. The security obligation of the travel agency is to safeguard the rights and interests of the tourists, but it does not mean that the legitimate rights and interests of the travel agency must be sacrificed. It is beneficial to clarify the liability of travel agencies in different circumstances and to better deal with the tourist disputes and safeguard the interests of all aspects. To use it, the legislation should be prudent. To divide the responsibility with the principle of fault liability, we can better take into account the rights and interests between the travel agencies and the tourists and promote the healthy development of the tourism industry.

【学位授予单位】：河南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923;D922.294

【相似文献】