经济法学视野下惩罚性赔偿适用问题研究

发布时间：2018-05-30 03:19

本文选题：惩罚性赔偿 + 外部性　；参考：《西南政法大学》2014年博士论文

【摘要】：惩罚性赔偿制度饱受争议，至今对该制度的争议尚未尘埃落定。争议的核心问题是惩罚性赔偿制度如何恰当的适用，从而既能充分发挥惩罚性赔偿制度的功能，又能避免惩罚性赔偿制度的滥用。惩罚性赔偿制度的功能是什么？实证地考察英美国家和大陆法系国家的惩罚性赔偿制度和经典案例，进而归纳惩罚性赔偿制度的功能是惩罚和遏制负外部性行为。在司法实践中英美法系国家较为普遍地适用惩罚性赔偿制度，经历了对侮辱行为的惩罚，滥用实力的惩罚，对危害行为的有效率的阻遏几个发展阶段。但是理论界和司法界对于该制度的性质，适用民事审判程序是否违宪等问题的争论从未停止过。德国和法国对于惩罚性赔偿制度拒绝接受，但在法律制度中又存在类似于惩罚性赔偿的法律制度，司法实践中法院也超出了传统的民事责任范围判决被告承担类似于惩罚性赔偿金的赔偿责任，在德国有痛苦赔偿金、歧视赔偿金、“预防性”赔偿金、民事罚金等制度，在法国的合同法律制度和知识产权法律制度中也均有适用。我国虽然有关于惩罚性赔偿的相关规定但是惩罚性赔偿制度的基础理论尚待完善，而且司法实践中存在法院针对同样的事实做出矛盾判决的现象，因而惩罚性赔偿制度的适用方法需要理论上的进一步探讨。适用惩罚性赔偿制度，发挥其功能的理论基础是什么？惩罚性赔偿制度是以功利主义为哲理基础，以解决社会公共危害为目的的法律制度。惩罚性赔偿制度是国家矫正侵害行为的工具，是对社会整体利益的维护。惩罚性赔偿的惩罚和阻遏功能与民法和刑法的理念是相矛盾和冲突的。为了解决这种冲突，理论界提出解决的三种路径：民事泛化论，惩罚私法化论，权利—过错—追索模式论，但是三种理论均未能有效的解决该矛盾。从惩罚性赔偿制度产生的背景、社会现实意义、运行机制、保护法益来看，惩罚性赔偿制度应当属于经济法性质。被告责任范围也从对受害人的侵害承担责任演变到对社会公众的侵害承担责任；但原告在获得惩罚性赔偿金时，也受到了不当得利的质疑。惩罚性赔偿制度经历了从补偿功能到惩罚与阻遏功能的演化，应当属于经济法律制度。经济法责任本身具有社会性、复合型、不对等和不平衡的特征，经济法责任理论可以对惩罚性赔偿制度做出合理的解释。惩罚性赔偿制度如何发挥作用，为什么有其他法律制度不能比拟的优势？法律制度具有社会调控功能，现实社会中存在若干危害公共的行为，对于该部分危害行为市场无法有效解决，而必须通过国家干预，通过制度解决。惩罚性赔偿制度相对于刑法、民法和行政法而言，更有效率。对于公共危害的解决，主要有两种路径：其一，通过刑法、行政法而产生遏制、威慑的“公共产品”；其二，将对侵害人提起诉讼而获得赔偿作为一种权利赋予受害人。哪种路径更有效率？因为公共产品具有非竞争性，由国家机关提供的，公共产品能否有效提供受制于国家机关的财力、人力等的制约，以及国家机关能否尽职尽责。民法的优势在于信息获取的便宜，程序简单，，追责较高的效率，如果涉及的侵害行为具有公共危害性，受害人众多，因而如果通过民事诉讼程序解决，诉讼成本高昂，因而不具有效率。惩罚性赔偿制度机制作用下，受害人受到高额惩罚性赔偿金的激励，会积极搜集相关信息，委托律师，尽快有效的对侵害人提起诉讼；而受害人之间甚至会产生竞争，从而进一步提高惩罚性赔偿制度的效率。因而具有公共危害性的侵害行为会被尽早发现，并由个人尽早的提起诉讼，进而予以阻遏。受害人提起的诉讼可以产生正的外部性，即侵害人因为被起诉，而不得不对相关的侵害行为予以收敛，乃至停止从事某些侵害行为，因而社会公众可以节省大量的预防成本。惩罚性赔偿制度功能发挥都受到哪些因素的影响或者限制？鉴于法律具有分配资源、社会调控的功能，因此经济学的方法来分析，更容易发现其内在机制。经济学语境下法律活动以实现效率最大化为目标。从经济学角度分析，惩罚性赔偿发挥作用的主要影响因素有：法律介入的时机，预期惩罚的严厉性，行为信息的充分性，行为人对于自身行为危险性的认知程度以及制度执行成本等。法律责任效用的发挥还受到归责原则的影响。严格责任原则下，法律适用的最佳状态是赔偿责任即惩罚性赔偿金与民事赔偿金之和等于损害，因为赔偿责任大于损害时，潜在的侵害人才有适当的动机采取预防措施，但是如果法律责任过大就会造成预防过度。在过错责任原则下，行为人通常会倾向于采取防御措施达到“通常注意”的行为标准，但这通常会造成防御不足，因而惩罚性赔偿可以加大责任，促使行为人进一步采取防御措施而避免损害的发生。不同法律体系的“土壤”对于惩罚性赔偿制度的适用也会产生影响，英美法系奉行司法能动主义，以有效的解决案件实际问题为目标，因而惩罚性赔偿制度适用的环境较为宽松，但有适用过度的倾向；大陆法系已有的严谨的法律制度体系很难为工具性很强的惩罚性赔偿制度找到一席之地，因而即便遇到“法律漏洞”时，大陆法系更倾向于通过对现有制度的扩张解释等方法解决，而不是创设缺乏部门法特征的制度。司法实践中，因为惩罚性赔偿制度具有惩罚的性质，所以惩罚性赔偿制度的适用应当有合理的限度，应当受到必要性的约束；而且惩罚性赔偿制度应当符合公平与效率的法律基本的价值要求；惩罚性赔偿金也应当具有合理性。我国如何适用惩罚性赔偿制度？首先，在我国法律制度不完善、社会管理过于倚重行政机关、道德失范的情况下，惩罚性赔偿制度在我国的建立和运行有着特殊的积极的现实意义。其次，根据经济法理论惩罚性赔偿适用的范围应当限定在：市场失灵且具有社会危害性，而民法和刑法等其他法律制度不足以发挥功能的情形。再次，我国的惩罚性赔偿制度应当进一步完善，现有法律制度中以商品价格作为惩罚性赔偿金计算基数的规定等无效率的规范应当修改；应当规定惩罚性赔偿的“一般条款”，以规范惩罚性赔偿法律规范的适用范围；应当借鉴分割式惩罚性赔偿金制度，建立惩罚性赔偿基金制度，使惩罚性赔偿金既对公共危害行为予以遏制，也可以激励受害人提起诉讼，还可以惠及社会公众。第四，司法实践中，惩罚性规范的适用方法主要涉及法律解释和证明标准两方面的问题。我国在惩罚性赔偿法律规范适用的实践中，存在法律规范解释方法不同而导致判决结果不同的问题，为了更为有效的适用惩罚性赔偿制度，法律解释方法应当予以统一，目的解释具有优先性。司法审判适用惩罚性赔偿案件中，以法官的自由心证作为认定事实的证明标准更符合我国国情，也更具有效率。
[Abstract]:The system of punitive damages has been disputed and the dispute on the system has not been settled yet. The core issue of the dispute is how to apply the punitive compensation system properly, which can not only give full play to the function of the punitive damages system, but also avoid the abuse of the punitive compensation system. What is the function of the penalty compensation system? The punitive compensation system and the classic cases of the countries of the British and American countries and the civil law countries are examined, and then the function of the punitive damages system is to punish and contain the negative externality. In the judicial practice, the punitive damages system is generally applied in the Anglo American legal system, and has experienced the punishment of insult and insult, the punishment of the abuse of strength, and the harm of the abuse of strength. The efficiency of the act has prevented several stages of development. However, the debate between the theorists and the judiciary on the nature of the system and whether the civil trial procedure is unconstitutional has never ceased. Germany and France refuse to accept the punitive damages system, but in the legal system, the judicial system is similar to punitive damages. In practice, the court also exceeded the traditional scope of civil liability to determine the defendant's liability for punitive damages. In Germany, there are painful indemnity, discrimination indemnity, "preventive" indemnity, and civil fines, which are also applicable in the legal system of contract and the legal system of intellectual property in France. On the relevant provisions of punitive damages, the basic theory of punitive damages system remains to be perfected, and there is a phenomenon that the court makes a contradictory judgment on the same facts in judicial practice, so the applicable method of the punitive damages system needs further discussion in theory. What is the foundation? Punitive damages system is a legal system based on utilitarianism as the philosophical basis to solve social public harm. The punitive damages system is a tool for the state to rectify the infringement and the maintenance of the whole social interests. The punishment and repressor function of punitive damages is inconsistent with the concept of civil law and criminal law. In order to solve this conflict, the theorists put forward three ways to solve this problem: the theory of civil generalization, the punishment of private law, the right to fault and the mode of recourse, but the three theories fail to solve the contradiction effectively. From the background of the punitive compensation system, the social reality, the operating mechanism, the protection of legal benefits, and the punitive compensation The system of compensation should belong to the nature of economic law. The scope of the defendant's liability also evolves from the responsibility of the victim to the social public, but the plaintiff has also been questioned by the unjust enrichment in obtaining punitive damages. The system of punitive damages has experienced the evolution from the compensatory function to the function of punishment and repression. When it belongs to the economic legal system, the responsibility of economic law itself has the characteristics of social, complex, unequal and unbalanced, and the theory of economic law liability can make a reasonable explanation of the punitive compensation system.
How does the punitive compensation system play a role, why do other legal systems have an incomparable advantage? The legal system has the function of social regulation and regulation, and there are some harmful public actions in the real society, which can not be effectively solved in this part of the harmful behavior market, but it must be solved through the system through the state intervention and the system of punitive damages. Relative to the criminal law, the civil law and the administrative law are more efficient. There are two main ways to solve the public harm: first, the criminal law, the administrative law and the deterrence of the "public products"; secondly, to bring a lawsuit to the infringer and obtain compensation as a right to the victim. Which way is more efficient? Because public The common products are non competitive, provided by the state organs, whether the public products can effectively provide the financial resources of the state organs, the constraints of human resources, and the full duty of the state organs. The advantages of the civil law lie in the cheap access to information, the simple procedure, the high efficiency, and the public harm if the infringements involved. There are many victims, so if they are solved by civil procedure, the cost of litigation is high, so it is not efficient. Under the mechanism of punitive damages, the victims are encouraged by the high punitive damages, and they will actively collect relevant information and entrust a lawyer to bring a lawsuit to the infringer as soon as possible; and even the victims will produce between them. Competition will further improve the efficiency of the punitive compensation system. Therefore, the violation of public harm will be discovered as soon as possible, and the individual will initiate a lawsuit as soon as possible, and then repression. The lawsuit brought by the victim can produce positive externality, that is, the victim has to be prosecuted and have to give the related infringements. Convergence, and even stop engaging in certain violations, the public can save a great deal of cost of prevention. What factors are affected or restricted by the function of punitive damages? In view of the function of the law to allocate resources and social regulation, the analysis of economic methods and the more easy discovery of its internal mechanism. In the context of context, legal activities are aimed at maximizing efficiency. From an economic perspective, the main influencing factors of punitive damages are: the timing of the legal intervention, the severity of the expected punishment, the adequacy of the behavior information, the cognitive degree of the perpetrator for the perpetrator of its own behavior, and the cost of the system. The exertion of utility is also influenced by the principle of imputation. Under the principle of strict liability, the best state of the application of the law is the liability of the punitive and civil compensation, which is equal to the damage, because when the liability is greater than the damage, the potential infringer has the appropriate motive to take preventive measures, but if the legal liability is too large it will be made. Under the principle of fault liability, the perpetrator usually tends to take defensive measures to meet the "usual attention" behavior standard, but this usually causes insufficient defense, so punitive damages can increase responsibility and encourage the perpetrator to take further defensive measures to avoid damage. "Soil in different legal systems" "The application of punitive damages will also have an impact. The Anglo American law system pursues judicial activism and aims to effectively solve the actual problems of the case. Therefore, the environment of the punitive damages system is more relaxed, but there is an excessive tendency to apply, and the strict legal system system in the continental law system is difficult to be very instrumental. The system of punitive damages finds a place, so even when it meets "legal loophole", the continental law system is more inclined to solve the system through the expansion of the existing system, rather than creating a system lacking the characteristics of the department law. In judicial practice, punitive compensation system has the nature of punishment, so punitive damages system The application of the punitive compensation system should be bound by the necessity, and the punitive compensation system should conform to the basic legal value requirements of fairness and efficiency, and the punitive damages should also be reasonable.
How to apply the system of punitive damages in our country? First, in the case of imperfect legal system in our country, in the case of social management too heavily on administrative organs and moral anomie, the system of punitive damages has a special positive and practical significance in the establishment and operation of our country. Secondly, the scope of the application of punitive damages according to the theory of economic law should be limited to The market failure and social harmfulness, and other legal systems such as civil law and criminal law are not sufficient to function. Thirdly, the punitive compensation system in our country should be further improved. In the existing legal system, the uneffective norms such as the price of commodity as the base of the punitive damages should be amended; it should be stipulated The "General Provisions" of punitive damages should be used to regulate the scope of application of the legal norms of punitive damages; the system of punitive damages should be used for reference, and the system of punitive damages should be established to make punitive damages not only to contain public harm, but also to encourage the victims to bring a lawsuit and to benefit the public. Four, in judicial practice, the applicable methods of punitive norms mainly involve two aspects of legal interpretation and standard of proof. In the practice of the applicable legal norms of punitive damages, there are different problems in the result of the judgment, which are different in the interpretation of the legal norms. In order to apply the system of punitive damages more effectively, the legal interpretation is made. The method should be unified, and the purpose is to explain the priority. In the case of punitive damages for judicial trial, the standard of proof of the judge's free heart is more consistent with the national conditions of our country and more efficient.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D922.29

【参考文献】