高度危险责任解释论

发布时间：2018-05-05 04:25

本文选题：高度危险责任 + 立法模式　；参考：《中央民族大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：2009年12月通过的《中华人民共和国侵权责任法》设专章第九章规定了高度危险责任,共用九个法条初步建立了高度危险责任体系,特别是第69条,被学界称之为高度危险责任的一般条款,具有兜底性、开放性、法律解释性功能,法官可通过对其进行解释,弥补具体列举式的不足,适应科技的发展和社会的进步,以满足对新出现的高度危险类型调整和规制的需要。然而立法的开放性和法律的确定性是一对矛盾,在实践中,由于对高度危险责任的规范意旨、价值取向、内涵和外延理解得不准确,往往会不当适用高度危险责任,具体表现为:盲目扩大高度危险责任的范围,适用的标准不统一,片面地适用高度危险责任。此外在适用中还会出现对责任主体认定不清,限额赔偿的标准差异大等问题。产生上述问题最根本的原因皆是对高度危险责任中"高度危险"这一核心要素的界定不明确,笔者希望通过对高度危险责任的历史沿革,价值取向,国外的立法趋势进行分析,对高度危险责任进行解释,以明确"高度危险"的内涵,使高度危险责任在合理的范围内适用。文章由引言、正文、结语三部分组成,正文包括四个章节。第一章是高度危险责任的历史沿革和价值取向。介绍了危险责任在各国的形成过程,并提出我高度危险责任的价值取向是实现分配正义,以及高度危险责任的法理依据。第二章是我国高度危险责任的基本内容和适用中存在的问题。介绍了高度危险责任的归责原则和构成要件,对高度危险责任存在争议的问题进行解析,提出了高度危险责任适用中存在的问题,包括适用范围混乱,责任主体不清以及限额赔偿适用范围窄。第三章提出高度危险责任中"高度危险"的内涵。包括必备要素和非必备要素。运用了动态体系理论的观点,并结合列举要素式所考虑的要素,其中必备要素包括损害的不可避免性、损害的严重性以及造成损害原因的异常性;非必备要素包括危险行为进行的场所、危险行为及危险物的既定标准以及该行为的社会价值。第四章介绍了高度危险责任的外部边界,包括产品责任、违反安全保障义务责任、环境污染责任和物件损害责任。通过比较论证的方式,明确了这些责任类型与高度危险责任的区别,以避免在具体适用中造成混淆,盲目扩大高度危险责任的适用范围。结语部分对上文进行了总结,在对高度危险责任进行界定过程中,应以"高度危险"作为前提确定高度危险责任,以外部边界排除相似侵权责任的适用。
[Abstract]:Chapter IX of the Chapter IX of the Tort liability Law of the people's Republic of China, adopted in December 2009, provides for a high degree of risk liability, and the sharing of nine articles establishes a system of high risk liability, in particular article 69. The general clause of high risk responsibility, which is called by the academic circles, has the function of bottom, openness and legal interpretation. Judges can make up for the deficiency of specific enumeration by interpreting it, and adapt to the development of science and technology and the progress of society. To meet the new high risk types of adjustment and regulation needs. However, the openness of legislation and the certainty of law are a pair of contradictions. In practice, due to the inaccurate understanding of the normative intent, value orientation, connotation and extension of the high risk responsibility, it is often not appropriate to apply the high risk responsibility. The concrete manifestation is: blindly expands the scope of the high danger responsibility, the applicable standard is not unified, applies the high danger responsibility one-sidedly. In addition, there are still some problems in the application, such as unclear identification of the subject of responsibility and large difference in the standard of the limitation compensation. The most fundamental reason for the above problems is that the definition of "high risk" in the high risk responsibility is not clear. The author hopes to analyze the historical evolution, value orientation and foreign legislative trend of the high risk responsibility. In order to clarify the connotation of "high danger" and make it applicable within a reasonable range, the high risk liability is explained. The article consists of three parts: introduction, text and conclusion. The text includes four chapters. The first chapter is the historical evolution and value orientation of high risk responsibility. This paper introduces the forming process of dangerous responsibility in various countries, and points out that the value orientation of our high risk responsibility is the legal basis for the realization of distributive justice and the high risk responsibility. The second chapter is the basic content of our country's high risk responsibility and the problems existing in its application. This paper introduces the imputation principle and constitutive elements of the high risk liability, analyzes the controversial problems of the high risk liability, and puts forward the problems existing in the application of the high risk liability, including the confusion of the scope of application. The subject of liability is unclear and the scope of limitation compensation is narrow. The third chapter puts forward the connotation of "high danger" in high risk responsibility. Including essential elements and non-essential elements. The author applies the viewpoint of dynamic system theory and enumerates the elements considered in the form of elements, among which the necessary elements include the inevitability of damage, the severity of damage and the abnormal cause of damage. Non-essential elements include the place where the dangerous behavior is carried out, the established standards of the dangerous behavior and its social value. The fourth chapter introduces the external boundary of high risk liability, including product liability, breach of safety and security obligation, environmental pollution liability and object damage liability. By means of comparison and argumentation, this paper clarifies the difference between these types of liability and the high risk responsibility, so as to avoid confusion in the concrete application and blindly expand the scope of application of the high risk liability. The conclusion part summarizes the above, in the process of defining the high risk liability, we should take the "high danger" as the premise to determine the high danger responsibility, and exclude the application of similar tort liability with the external boundary.
【学位授予单位】：中央民族大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923

【参考文献】