不明责任人高空抛物致害责任及法律救济

发布时间：2018-03-24 21:21

本文选题：高空抛物　切入点：侵权责任　出处：《广西大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：不明责任人高空抛物致害行为是区分所有的高层建筑物使用人或者其他居住人从建筑物内抛掷物品导致他人人身、财产遭受重大伤害或损害,而无法查明真正行为人的行为。2009年《侵权责任法》第87条的出台为高空抛物致害案件的解决指出了明确的方向,结束了长期以来无法可依的无奈境地。但随着城市化进程的加快,高空抛物现象的频繁发生,《侵权责任法》的相关规定又面临着巨大的挑战。由于第87条出台的时间较短,规定过于宽泛,很多司法实践中的高空抛物问题都无法得到妥善的解决。如第87条规定,在难以确定具体行为人时,由“可能加害的建筑物使用人”给予补偿,貌似是给可能加害人划定了一定范围,但如何才能排除可能性,可能的范围有多大,侵权责任法并没有给我们明确的答案。同时,建筑物使用人在这里也是一个不确定的概念,建筑物的所有权人,承租人,管理人,借用人以及其他形成实际使用关系的人,是否都是第87条所指的建筑物使用人呢?而且第87条也没有提供可参考的补偿标准,到底是按份补偿还是承担连带责任,都没有进行明确的规定。最后,这一规定在法理上无法证成其正当性,也不符合侵权行为的构成要件,更混淆了不同的法律关系及其责任形式,故《侵权责任法》第87条应当删除,将高空抛物行为归为侵权法中的公共场所管理者的义务当中去规范,由物业管理企业对高空抛物行为进行日常监督管理,同时引入其他法律部门共同分担该法条的救济功能。本文试图以典型事例为引导,对《侵权责任法》第87条进行全面解读,结合其法理上的正当性与侵权行为的构成要件方面进行探讨,最后通过刑法以及行政法等部门法之间的联系进行分析探究,对不明责任人高空抛物致害责任的承担提出切实可行的建议,实现对被害人权利的救济以及维护法律的公平正义。
[Abstract]:The act of parabolic harm caused by unknown persons is to distinguish between all the occupants of high-rise buildings or other occupants who throw objects from the building to cause serious injury or damage to other persons' bodies and property. The introduction of Article 87 of the 2009 Tort liability Law points out a clear direction for the resolution of parabolic injury cases at a high altitude. But with the acceleration of urbanization and the frequent occurrence of parabolic phenomena at high altitudes, the relevant provisions of the Tort liability Law are facing enormous challenges. The provisions are so broad that many high-altitude parabolic problems in judicial practice cannot be properly resolved. For example, article 87 provides that, when it is difficult to identify specific perpetrators, compensation shall be given to "potential users of buildings". It seems that we have defined a certain range of potential perpetrators, but how to rule out the possibility and how large the possible scope is, the tort liability law does not give us a clear answer. At the same time, the building user here is also an uncertain concept. Are the owners, lessees, administrators, borrowers and other persons forming an actual relationship of use of the building, all of whom are the users of the building referred to in Article 87? Moreover, Article 87 does not provide a standard of compensation that can be referred to. There is no clear stipulation as to whether the compensation is to be made on a prorated basis or on the basis of joint and several liability. Finally, this provision cannot be justified legally. It also does not conform to the constitutive requirements of tort and confuses different legal relationships and forms of liability. Therefore, Article 87 of the Tort liability Law should be deleted. Classifying parabolic behavior at high altitude as the duty of public place administrator in tort law to standardize the daily supervision and management of parabolic behavior at high altitude by property management enterprises, At the same time, other legal departments are introduced to share the relief function of this law. This paper attempts to interpret Article 87 of the Tort liability Law in a comprehensive way under the guidance of typical cases. Combined with the legitimacy of its legal theory and the constitutive elements of tort, finally through the criminal law, administrative law and other departments of the relationship between the analysis and exploration, The author puts forward some practical suggestions on the responsibility of parabolic injury caused by parabolic injury in the upper air to realize the relief of the victim's rights and to maintain the fairness and justice of the law.
【学位授予单位】：广西大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923

【相似文献】