【作者】 贺志新；

【导师】 彭熙海；

【作者基本信息】 湘潭大学 ， 法律， 2007， 硕士

【摘要】 近年来,出现了许多社会公众在住宿、餐饮、娱乐、列车、银行等经营场所或其他社会活动场所遭受人身、财产损害的案件,安全保障义务遂成为侵权法领域中的热点问题。由于对经营场所或其他社会活动场所的安全保障义务问题理论研究不够深入,而法律规范又较零散,一直没有统一的法律规范可供遵循,导致各地法院在审理此类案件中,对如何正确认定责任以及如何落实损失赔偿责任等一系列问题上,法官们普遍感到缺乏裁判依据,使某些相同类型的案件因裁判法官认识的差异而呈现出不同的裁判结果,客观上影响了人民法院依法公正、及时地审理案件。最高人民法院《关于审理人身损害赔偿案件适用法律若干问题的解释》的出台,填补了我国侵权行为法的真空地带,为规范和统一违反安全保障义务侵权案件的法律适用提供了法律依据。但这一司法解释层面上的规则不足以诠释整个安全保障义务,在理论界对安全保障义务仍存在许多分歧。因而对安全保障义务进行系统研究也就成为当务之急。由于安全保障义务人相对于权利人处于“优势”地位,其有足够的能力防止损害的发生,因此必须以利益均衡原则为出发点来界定安全保障义务的概念、认定其法律性质、划定其内容和判定标准、规定违反安全保障义务的法律责任,以实现权利人与义务人两者利益关系的动态平衡,达到公平和效率的价值目标。为此,必须结合我国现有立法现状,借鉴国外成功经验,就我国安全保障义务的立法模式的选择和安全保障义务在侵权行为法的地位进行分析。文章认为我国应采安全保障义务的一般化与类型化相结合的二元立法模式,并进一步细分违反安全保障义务的侵权行为类型,将更多的社会生活领域纳入到安全保障义务的调整范围。并认为应以归责原则为标准来划分所有侵权行为类型;应当进一步扩大安全保障义务的适用范围,将保护范围扩大到“人身与财产”;明确规定采用过错推定的归责原则和补充责任形式;明确规定不同情形下的诉讼主体,以利于实现权利人的赔偿请求权;必须对安全保障义务作出更为完整的立法设计,从而形成统一的安全保障义务规则体系,以期能更有效地防止违反安全保障义务的侵权事件发生,更合理地转移和分散损失,为受害人提供公平、合理和充分的救济。更多还原

【Abstract】 In recent years,there are lots of damage of the personal and property rights in public places,such as hotels,amusement site,restaurant,trains,banking and other business operations or other social activities site.The obligation of security becomes the central issue in the field of tort law and gives rise to many disputes.Whereas,the study and discussions on the theories of the security obligation are comparatively few,and the relevant legal provisions are scattered.Because there isn’t any united law or rule to direct,the judge is short of rule to verdict generally when facing the problems like proper to settle the duty, damage compensation like others.Those factors affect the judge to decide correctly and timely because the different understand to the cases,and lead to different judge results for the same type of case.With the appearing Interpretation of Many Problems of Applicable Laws in Connection with Hearing Personal Injury Compensation Case as issued by The Supreme People’s Court,it has filled the blank to the tort law and provided theory basis for legal enforcement which is to regulate and integrates the case of violation the security obligation.But this interpretation isn’t enough to demonstrate the obligation of security. There is lots of divergence in theoretical field with the obligation of security,so to make a systematic study on the obligation of security is urgent.Because the security obligator has superiority to the consumers,the security obligator is able to prevent the damages.To seek the dynamic interest balance between the security obligator and consumers and to realize justice and efficiency,we must take the principle of benefit balance as starting point to define the concept of the obligation of security,the nature,settle the content of law and the judge standard and set up the legal obligation of the security obligation.So we must think about the present situation of legislation and judicial practice in China and learn from other countries` successful experience.We must analyze the legislative mode of the security obligation and arrange the position of the obligation of security under the future Tort Law.And we have to propose and adopt the dual-legislation mode of generalization and classification of the obligation of security and further classify the types of the obligation of security in order to bring more rights into the scope of the security obligation.Furthermore,we should propose the idea that classifies the types of all tort action with the duty principles.We must continue to enlarge the applicable range of the security obligation and expand the scope to protect to the personal and property rights.To establish the fault assumption principles and the supplementary liability clearly and fix suite subjects under various conditions in order to realize the victim’s damage claims.This paper puts forward some feasible legislative advices to improve the legislative design of the security obligation and form the united systematic rule of the security duty.Those advices in order to effectively prevent happening of tort violating the security duty and to rationally transfer and distribute the damage can provide the victim with fair,reasonable and sufficient remedy.更多还原