网络预约出租汽车服务的法律问题研究

发布时间：2018-05-14 16:23

本文选题：暂行办法 + 新业态　；参考：《华中师范大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：顺应网络技术发展的潮流,共享经济中的佼佼者一网络预约出租车展现出极强的市场适应性,对传统的出租汽车造成了极大冲击,世界范围内对于以Uber为代表的网约车的态度表现不同,我国网约车的本土化产品-滴滴打车在国内同样也面临着官方不同的对待,有关监管部门的态度总体经历了否定-中立-有保留地合法化的变化历程。2016年7月27日,7部委联合发布的《网络预约出租汽车经营服务管理暂行办法》出台,正式地宣告网络预约出租车成为我国出租车行业的一员,但是该《暂行办法》也在无形之中给网约车这一互联网的新业态套上了许多隐形枷锁。为此,本文将该《暂行办法》呈现出的种种法律问题作为研究主题。具体研究路径为:第一部分介绍《暂行办法》出台的背景。在共享经济飞速发展的背景下,传统出租汽车行业受到了极大的冲击,因此欧美亚各国对其态度不一,有的持支持态度,也有国家对此一概封杀,在我国国内,网约车带来全民出行便利的同时,也给社会带来了一些违法甚至犯罪事件,这也给一些地方政府取缔网约车提供了一些借口。笔者简要介绍《暂行办法》的规定,并进而提出几个法律问题和本文研究的主要方向。第二部分是关于网约车服务的定性问题,法律定性往往意味着对其认识的深度,本文主要是从其与传统出租汽车、“黑车”、纯粹的居间服务的对比,从而将网约车与以上三种定性区别开,然后将其定性为一种遵循共享经济理念和方式的新业态。第三部分是关于网约车服务的许可模式,众所周知的是,在我国,出租车从事客运服务实行的是特别许可制,这实质上是一种有违市场规律和缺乏法理依据的制度,网络预约出租车新兴的当下,笔者认为网约车不宜再适用该种特别许可制。根据《行政许可法》的有关规定,特许经营制度是基于优化配置自然资源、公共资源和直接关系到公共利益的特定行业的考量,通过论证,笔者认为,网络预约出租汽车应该变特别许可为一般许可制。第四部分是关于打车平台与平台司机之间的法律关系界定,笔者从探讨英美法系和大陆法系对于劳动关系认定的标准入手,进而指出我国规范性文件中对于劳动关系的认定标准较为缺乏,只在部门规章中才有零星记载。在认定打车平台与网约车司机之间关系之前,笔者将目前流行的网约车模式分成三类,四方协议模式、准四方协议模式和三方协议模式,三种模式应区别对待,不能等而视之。第五部分是关于打车平台侵权责任的分配,对于侵权责任的承担问题,又有乘客受伤与乘客之外第三人的受伤两种不同情况,我国目前对于侵权责任承担问题的理论多数采用的是“运行利益”和“运行控制”学说相结合,而平台与司机对于车辆运行都存在着或直接或间接的运行利益和运行控制。
[Abstract]:Following the trend of the development of network technology, the leader of the sharing economy, the online taxi booking, has shown a strong market adaptability, which has caused a great impact on the traditional taxi. In the world, the attitude of Uber is different. Didi Taxi, the local product of our country, also faces different treatment in our country. On the whole, the attitude of the relevant regulatory authorities has undergone a process of change from negative-neutral to legalization of reserved land. On July 27, 2016, the "interim measures on the Management of online booking Taxi Business Service", jointly issued by seven ministries and commissions, was promulgated. It is officially announced that the online taxi booking has become a member of the taxi industry in China, but the interim method has also put many invisible shackles on the new form of the Internet. For this reason, this article takes various legal problems presented by the interim measures as the subject of study. The specific research path is: the first part introduces the background of the provisional measures. Under the background of the rapid development of the shared economy, the traditional taxi industry has been greatly impacted. Therefore, the European and American Asian countries have different attitudes towards it, some of them support it, and some countries have all blocked it. In our country, While it brings convenience to the whole people, it also brings some illegal and even criminal incidents to the society, which also provides some excuses for some local governments to ban it. The author briefly introduces the provisions of "interim measures", and then puts forward several legal problems and the main research directions of this paper. The second part is about the qualitative problem of ride-hailing service, legal characterization often means the depth of understanding, this article is mainly from the traditional taxi, "black car", pure intermediary service comparison, Therefore, it distinguishes the three qualitative characteristics of the three above, and then characterizes it as a new business state following the concept and mode of shared economy. The third part is about the license mode of the ride-hailing service. It is well known that in our country, the special license system is implemented in the passenger transport service of taxis, which in essence is a system that violates the laws of the market and lacks legal basis. At present, the author thinks that the special license system should not be applied to the online taxi booking. According to the relevant provisions of the Administrative Licensing Law, the franchise system is based on the consideration of optimizing the allocation of natural resources, public resources and specific industries directly related to public interests. Online taxi booking should be changed from a special license to a general license system. The fourth part is about the legal relationship between the ride-hailing platform and the driver of the platform. Furthermore, it is pointed out that the standard of labor relations in the normative documents of our country is relatively lacking, and only in the departmental rules and regulations can there be sporadic records. Before determining the relationship between the ride-hailing platform and the ride-hailing drivers, the author divides the popular ride-hailing modes into three types: the quadripartite agreement model, the quasi-quadripartite agreement model and the three-party agreement mode. The three modes should be treated differently and cannot be regarded as such. The fifth part is about the distribution of tort liability on the taxi platform, and there are two different situations of passenger injury and the injury of the third person other than the passenger. At present, most of the theories of tort liability in our country adopt the theory of "operation benefit" and "operation control", while the platform and driver have direct or indirect operation benefits and operation control for the vehicle operation.
【学位授予单位】：华中师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.296

【相似文献】