【作者】 李颖；

【导师】 许传玺；

【作者基本信息】 中国政法大学 ， 民商法学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 比较过错是指为了谋求负损害赔偿义务的加害人与受害人之间的公平,当受害人对损害的发生或者扩大具有过错时,得减轻或者免除赔偿之金额的法律制度。通过对不同法域国家的比较观察,可以发现随着各国经济的发展,比较过错制度朝着更全面补偿受害人的方向发展。在国际上加强受害人权利保护的背景下,中国的立法和司法现状存在很多问题,立法不尽完善,司法实践不够统一,存在明显的减责倾向,严重损害了受害人的权益。而在理论上,国内学者对比较过错制度的研究不够充分,存在着很多尚待解决的问题。我国目前还没有对比较过错制度进行系统研究的成果,这也正是作者在本文中尝试突破之处。本文着眼于比较过错制度的原理和适用及其对责任分担的影响,以比较过错制度在当代的发展趋势为主线,试图从大陆法系和英美法系的比较过错制度的理论沿革和不同问题的争点中形成据以指导实践的理论成果,进而构建适合中国司法实践的比较过错处理框架。除引言和结论,本文分为两大部分,分别从理论和适用的角度对比较过错制度进行了论述。第一部分从理论角度分析比较过错,由对比较过错概念与性质的探析,比较过错的历史考察与实证分析,比较过错及其发展趋势的理论阐释三章构成。第二部分从适用角度论述比较过错制度,由比较过错的构成要件,比较过错的适用范围,严格责任中的比较过错和比较过错对责任分担的影响四章构成。论文第一章对比较过错制度的概念和性质进行了分析,以作为下文研究的前提性论证。第二章比较过错制度的历史考察,阐释了大陆法系和英美法系的比较过错制度都遵循了相同的发展趋势,即比较过错制度朝着更全面补偿的方向发展,其背后的原因在于社会经济的发展、价值观念的演化和法律政策的变迁。第三章对比较过错制度自身及其发展趋势的理论基础进行了详细论证。认为比较过错制度作为一项抗辩的合理理由是正义和公平。并指出比较过错合理性基础与侵权法功能之间存在潜在的紧张关系,特别是在严格责任中,这一紧张关系表现得更为明显,为避免这种紧张状态的存在,必须对比较过错的适用进行排除或是限制。而且在侵权法“及时填补受害人损失"这一发展趋势的影响下,现代各国基本上都选择了“受害人优位”的立法政策。比较过错制度向有利于受害人方向发展的趋势,在特殊情形下对比较过错抗辩进行限制或者排除都是这一立法政策的具体体现。以发展趋势为指导,第四章对比较过错的构成要件进行了全面分析,认为比较过错的构成要件有以下三项:即受害人须具有过错能力,受害人必须具有过错,受害人行为与损害结果之间须有因果关系,并指出了其与过错责任各要件在性质和适用标准上的不同。第五章论述比较过错制度的适用范围。第一节解决比较过错的主体适用范围,即在什么情形下,才能将第三人的过失归于受害人,从而看成是受害人一方的过错。本节着重对法定代理人之过失可否归于未成年人进行了论证,并得出以下结论:只有在那些具有辨识能力的儿童或者精神病人自身具有过失的时候,才能减轻或者免除加害人的赔偿责任。第二部分分析比较过错适用的责任类型和排除比较过错适用的情形。第六章分析严格责任中的比较过错制度,并对我国严格责任中比较过错制度进行了重构。指出在工伤事故领域,非机动车驾驶人遭受人身损害时的交通事故领域,核能等放射性物质造成损害的领域,当行为人的行为造成导致受害人损害的巨大危险时,受害人的过错不应成为免除或减轻行为人责任的事由,除非受害人的过错属于不可原谅的过错,并且是损害发生的唯一诱因,或者,受害人是自愿追求他所遭受的损害的。第二节对几种具体严格责任中的比较过错进行了分析。第七章对比较过错对责任分担的影响与实际操作方法进行了全面阐释,并认为应当区分过错责任和严格责任的不同情形来进行责任分担的操作。在过错责任原则中,应当主要考虑加害人与受害人之间的过错比例,而把因果关系看成是“守门”概念。而在严格责任中,比较理想的解决方法是依各当事人的行为对于损害的原因力大小来决定损害的分配,当加害人具有明显的故意或者重大过失,这时也要考虑加害人的过错因素。最后,在过错和原因力之外,在分配责任时还应纵观案情来考量其它因素,从而对责任承担结果进行“衡平调节”。更多还原

【Abstract】 The term "comparative fault" might be used to describe any system of law that apportions damages on the basis of the relative culpability of the responsible tortfeasor and victim.The comparative examination of the various systems reveals a trend towards fuller compensation as the economy of a particular state expands.Under this background,there are a lot of problems in our legislation and judicial practice.Our legislation is underdeveloped and the judicial practice is not consistent.There is an obvious tendency to reduce responsibilities of tortfeasors in our judicial practice and there are a lot of blank spots in theory.So there is no systematic dissertation about comparative fault system in china and this work attempts to attain this objective.This paper focus on the principle and application of the comparative fault system,follows the development trend of the comparative fault rule,and tries to form some theory conclusions to direct our practice.Besides the preface and conclusion,there are seven chapters in this paper.Chapter one analyzes the definition and nature of the comparative fault system.In Chapter Two,the history evolution and the comparative examination of the various systems reveal a trend towards fuller compensation as the economy of a particular state expands.The reasons exist in the evolution of values,social demands and legal policy.Chapter three reveals the theory bases of the comparative fault and its development trend.The most common justification of comparative fault as a defense is justice and fairness.Furthermore,there is a certain tension between the goals of tort liability and justifications of comparative fault.Especially in strict liability,the defense reduces the scope and effect of liability may operate to frustrate and undermine some or all of the liability aims,this tension leads to the conclusion that the defense should be either totally denied or at least restricted.Moreover,this conclusion is an expression of the legislation policy of "the injured party prevails".Chapter three analyzes thoroughly the component conditions of comparative fault.First,the injured party must have tortious capacity. Second,the injured party neglects duty of care for himself.Third,there is a causation between the injured party’s act and the damages.Along the development trend,chapter four analyzes the application sphere of the comparative fault system.The first section discusses the imputation of third persons as comparative fault and draws a conclusion that judges can diminish or exempt the tortfeasor from responsibility when the children,insane persons with tortious capacity neglect duty of care for themselves.The second section deals with the causes of action governed by comparative fault and the conditions of disregarding comparative fault defense.Chapter six discourses on the comparative fault system under strict liability and reconstructs the comparative fault system under strict liability in china.When a person suffers injury in industrial accident or in a nuclear energy accident,or a non-motor vehicle driver suffers personal injury,the victim’s fault should not be the cause for exempting or reducing the liability of the tortfeasor.Unless the victim’s fault is unforgivable,and is the only incentive for the damage,or the victim is voluntary to pursuit the suffered damage.The Second section analyzes the comparative fault principle in some specific strict liability conditions.Chapter seven analyses thoroughly the consequences of comparative fault rule.The apportionment rule under fault liability and strict liability should be different.When apportioning damages under fault liability,fault should be the main consideration and the causal relationship should be the "gatekeeper" concept.When apportion damages under strict liability,causal relationship should be the main consideration.When the tortfeasor is obviously intentional or has gross negligence,the fault of the tortfeasor must also be considered.Finally,besides fault and causal relationship, Judges should weigh other factors in the "equitable adjustment" stage.更多还原