输血致害责任举证规则实证研究

发布时间：2018-04-02 14:03

本文选题：输血致害责任　切入点：举证规则　出处：《法学论坛》2015年05期

【摘要】：《侵权责任法》第54、58条关于医疗侵权责任举证规则的规定,未涉及推定因果关系,将推定过错限制于三类情形,弱化了《证据规定》开始采纳的举证责任倒置规则的影响。基于对输血致害责任领域140个典型案例样本的分析,发现《侵权责任法》弱化举证责任倒置规则的举措未对输血致害责任司法实践产生实质性影响。这与立法条文本身设置、未充分考虑司法实践意见及规范性文件效力位阶混乱有关,与采血输血的专业性及致害的严重性也不无关联。未来法律解释应充分考虑输血致害的特性及司法实践对举证责任倒置的态度,以更好地平衡患者与医疗机构之间的利益。
[Abstract]:Article 5458 of the Tort liability Law does not deal with the presumption of causality, which limits the presumption of fault to three types of cases, and weakens the influence of the rule of inversion of the burden of proof that has been adopted in the provision of evidence.Based on the analysis of 140 typical cases in the field of blood transfusion injury liability, it is found that the act of weakening the rule of inversion of the burden of proof in the Tort liability Law has no substantial effect on the judicial practice of blood transfusion injury liability.This has something to do with the legislative provisions themselves, not taking full account of judicial opinions and normative documents, the confusion of the effectiveness of documents, and the professional nature of blood transfusion and the severity of harm caused by blood transfusion.In the future legal interpretation should take into account the characteristics of blood transfusion injury and the attitude of judicial practice to the reversal of the burden of proof in order to better balance the interests between patients and medical institutions.
【作者单位】：华东政法大学科学研究院;
【基金】：上海市社科规划课题一般课题《输血感染病毒侵权责任实证研究——以上海;河南为研究对象》(2014BFX009)阶段性成果
【分类号】：D923

【参考文献】