摘要
《侵权责任法》第二十四条延续《民法通则》第一百三十二条所确立的公平责任规则是对公平价值理念的贯彻,但其不宜被认定为侵权法的归责原则,而应属于损失分担规则。通过对2008-2018年间法院二审判决书的梳理,可知法院多采纳"公平责任原则"的表述方式,司法实务对公平责任规则的适用存在将其与公平原则和责任减免事由混淆,错误地将其适用于合同法领域或无过错侵权领域,以及将其等价为人道补偿等诸多问题。其中,将公平责任等价为人道补偿的最主要表现在于裁判者只看重客观损失的存在,而忽略了公平责任规则适用所要求的因果关系构成要件。未来民法典宜明确规定公平责任规则的适用仅限于侵权法领域的过错侵权类型中,除双方不具有过错外,还必须要求行为人的行为与他人损害结果发生之间存在因果关系;若行为人没有采取任何行为,则不能要求其据此分担责任。
The article 24 of Tort Law that inherits equitable liability established in the article 132 of the General Principles of Civil Law is the implementation of the equitable value, but it should not be as the principle of imputation for the Tort Law, but as the rule of loss sharing. Combing through judgments of second instance from 2008 to 2018 can be seen that the court tends to adopt the expression of"the principle of equitable liability", and there are many problems in the application of equitable liability for judicial practice,such as confusing it with equity doctrine and deduction of liability, applying it wrongly in contract law and strict liability for tort law and equating it with humanitarian compensation which the important thing is that the referee only values. The existence of objective loss, but ignores the causality components of the equitable liability rule.The future Civil Code should clearly stipulate that the application of the equitable liability rule is limited to the fault infringement for Tort Law. Except that two parties are not at fault, there must be a causal relationship between the behaviour of the actor and the damage to others. If the actor takes no action, he cannot be required to share liability accordingly.
作者
石冠彬
谢春玲
Shi Guanbin;Xie Chunling
出处
《河南社会科学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2019年第9期25-37,共13页
Henan Social Sciences
基金
2018年度国家社会科学基金重大项目“人格权保护立法研究”(18ZDA143)
