【作者】 孙晓锋；

【导师】 江帆；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 经济法学， 2011， 硕士

【摘要】 近代意义上的惩罚性赔偿制度发端于英美法系,历经两百余年的发展,已然成为一项十分重要的法律责任制度。对于惩罚性赔偿制度,大陆法系国家和地区却普遍采取了抵制和对抗的态度,因为大陆法系传统法学理论坚守严格的公、私法划分,主张损害赔偿理应恪守填补损失、同质救济的原则,而惩罚性赔偿制度的出现,无疑将会对整个法律责任体系形成。尽管在我国的一些单行法律规范中,已经引入了惩罚性赔偿责任,但是,由于我国从立法传统上深受大陆法系的影响,因此,惩罚性赔偿制度在我国自引入以来,一直备受争议。1993年,我国制定的《消费者权益保护法》(文中简称“《消法》”)首次在实体法中引入了惩罚性赔偿责任,之后,在2003年,最高人民法院又颁布了《关于审理商品房买卖合同纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的解释》(文中简称“《解释》”),其中的第8条、第9条、第14条第二款等规定,又将惩罚性赔偿制度纳入到商品房买卖纠纷处理制度之中。这是我国立法中的一次重大突破,该《解释》颁行实施以后,针对譬如商品房是否属于商品,商品房买受人是否属于“消费者”,《解释》与《消法》之间是何种关系,等等问题,在理论界和实务界引发了广泛的争论。针对上述问题和争论,本文从以下四部分展开论述,以期能够在一定程度上平息争论、化解问题。第一部分,以惩罚性赔偿制度的概论为题,介绍了该制度的内涵与主要特点、性质与归责原则、基本功能、制度源流等内容。其中,笔者着重强调惩罚性偿制度以惩罚和遏制不法行为为其首要功能,以过错责任作为归责原则,与经济法责任具有本质上的一致性。第二部分,阐述了我国商品房买卖中引入该制度的必要性与可行性。一方面,指出现阶段我国在商品房交易领域引入该制度具有必要性,另一方面,着力阐述了如何克服、破解业已存在的理论困境和实践障碍。第三部分,深刻剖析了我国商品房买卖中惩罚性赔偿的具体立法规定。在肯定现行立法积极效果的同时,着力指出了现行立法存在的种种缺陷和不足。第四部分,提出了我国商品房买卖中惩罚性赔偿制度的重构与完善建议。在对学术界几种立法思路进行分析的基础上,详细且有针对性地阐释了作者的具体建议,特别是在惩罚性赔偿金的归属方面,提出了建立受害人与社会共享机制的设想。更多还原

【Abstract】 The Punitive Damages System in modern sense was originated from the common law system, which has developed for more than two hundred years and now has been one of the most important system of legal responsibility, However, the countries and regions of the civil law system have generally taken the attitude of boycott and confrontation to the Punitive Damages System. It is mostly because that the traditional civil law system strictly adheres to the division about public and private laws, and claims that damages should be followed to the principle of Filling the Loss and Homogeneous Relief. The introduction of the Punitive Damages System will pose a threat to the entire legal systems with no doubt. The Punitive Damages System has been introduced to China’s single norms, but it has long been in the controversial for China’s traditional legislation has long been affected by the civil law system.In 1993, China formulated the Consumer Protection Law, and the Punitive Damages System was first introduced in the substantive law. In 2003, the Supreme Court promulgated the Interpretation about the Real Estate Contract Dispute on the Trial Case, in which Article 8, 9, 14 and so forth stipulates the Punitive Damages System, and it’s the first time to introduce it into the procession about the real estate contract dispute. This is a breakthrough in China’s legislation, And after the introduction of the Interpretation, a large number of widespread debate has been risen in theory and practice, such as weather the real estate belongs to goods , weather the buyer of the real estate is consumer, and what’s the relationship between the Interpretation and the Consumer Law, etc. To address the above issues, this article begins with four parts to discuss it. And the author hopes to solve these problems to a certain extent.The first part, its topic is about the overview of the Punitive Damages System. And then presents the System’s main feature, nature principle, basic function, history and so on. The author emphasizes the primary function of the System is about the punishment and curbing of illegal, and the System regards the faulty liability as its responsibility principle, which is consistent with the nature of economic law responsibility.The second part. It deeply describes about the necessity and feasibility of introducing the Punitive Damages System into China’s real estate transaction, On the one hand, it’s necessary to introduce it at this stage, on the other hand, it focuses on ways of overcoming and solving the current difficulties which exists in theory and practice.The third part. It profoundly analyzes the specific legislative provision about the Punitive Damages System in China’s real estate transaction. On the one hand it affirms the positive effect of China’s legislation, on the other hand, it points out that there are a large number of deficiencies and shortcoming in legislation.The fourth part. It proposes the reconstruction and perfection about the Punitive Damages System in China’s real estate transaction, And then it gives the author’s specific recommendations which is based on the current academic thoughts. This part conceives a sharing mechanism based on the victim and the community, which is established on the attribution of the damages.更多还原