紧急避险的民事责任

发布时间：2018-04-21 08:44

本文选题：侵权责任法 + 紧急避险　；参考：《浙江学刊》2010年04期

【摘要】：《民通意见》修改了《民法通则》关于紧急避险民事责任的规定,但《侵权责任法》在形式上并未接受这种修改;尽管解释论上协调这种矛盾并不困难,但协调必须基于规范论上的全面分析。本文认为应将防御性紧急避险和为了公益的紧急避险纳入不承担责任的紧急避险,并通过德国法和苏俄法的比较分析论证了合法行为民事责任的理论基础和实践展开。我国紧急避险立法模式具有不同于域外立法例的特殊性,因此本文在最后分析了我国紧急避险规定中的引起险情发生人责任和受益人责任,认为引起险情发生人责任在性质上属于侵权,不应笼统规定;而"受益人适当补偿"中的"适当"则可以参考《海商法》加以确定。
[Abstract]:The "opinions of the people's Republic of China" has amended the provisions of the General principles of Civil Law on civil liability for emergency avoidance, but the Tort liability Law has not accepted this amendment in form; although it is not difficult to reconcile this contradiction in terms of interpretation, But coordination must be based on a comprehensive analysis of the normative theory. This paper holds that the defensive emergency risk avoidance and the emergency avoidance for the public good should be included in the emergency hedge without liability, and the theoretical basis and practice of civil liability for lawful acts are demonstrated through the comparative analysis of German law and Soviet-Russian law. The legislative model of emergency risk avoidance in our country is different from that of the extraterritorial legislation. Therefore, this paper analyzes the liability of the person who caused the risk and the beneficiary's responsibility in the regulation of emergency risk avoidance in our country at the end of this paper. The author thinks that the liability of the person who caused the danger is tort in nature and should not be stipulated in general, and the "appropriate" in "appropriate compensation of beneficiary" can be determined by referring to the Maritime Law.
【作者单位】：北京大学法学院;
【分类号】：D923;D922.294

【参考文献】