摘要
由于《侵权责任法》第8条规范的是以意思联络为要件的共同加害行为,故而该法第11条与第12条调整的是两类因果关系类型不同的无意思联络的数人侵权。就主观状态而言,无意思联络的数人侵权不同于共同加害行为;而就因果关系来说,它又有别于以因果关系推定为基础的共同危险行为。在我国法上,加害部分不明的多数人侵权不属于共同危险行为,应分别适用《侵权责任法》第11、12条。该法第67条只是对环境污染者内部责任分摊的规定,并非是无意思联络数人侵权的例外。
Since the 'committed in common'of §8 of CTLL(China Tort Liability Law) means that several tortfeasors have conspiracy on causing damages to the plantiff,§11 and §12 just stipulate several concurrent tortfeaors.The several concurrent tortfeaors is different from joint tortfeaser in subject element and from joint dangerous act in the element of causation.§11 and §12 of CTLL are not the independent basis of claims.They only stipulate the the tortfeasors' relationship,that is to say,joint liability or several liability.When each tortfeasor's liablity share can not be certain in many tortfeasors,§11 or §12 not§10 can be applied.Lastly,§67 of CTLL is not an exception to§11 and§12.
出处
《暨南学报（哲学社会科学版）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2011年第5期65-76,162,共12页
Jinan Journal(Philosophy and Social Sciences)
基金
北京市哲学社会科学项目<现代社会大规模权责任之研究>(批准号:2010SKL003)
清华大学自主科研计划课题<现代社会大规模侵权责任研究>(批准号:Z02-I2010THZ0)
