侵權法上與有過失法律規則研究

Study on Rules of Comparative Negligence in Law of Torts

Student thesis: Doctoral Thesis

View graph of relations

Author(s)

Related Research Unit(s)

Detail(s)

Awarding Institution
Supervisors/Advisors
Award date20 Dec 2022

Abstract

随着改革开放四十余年我国法治进程的快速发展,侵权法上的受害人过错责任制度不断完善,形成了较为清晰的“总则+特别列举式规范”的立法脉络。从《民法通则》第131条、《侵权法》第26条、《民法典》第1173条等一般法,再到《道路安全法》、《产品质量法》等特别法,相关立法规定了在受害人与有过失情形下,可以减轻或免除侵权人责任的法律规则。然而,与有过失作为侵权法上使用频率最高的一项抗辩事由,在法学理论和实践研究中并未得到足够的重视。理论界对于责任形态构成和责任分担规则缺乏深入的、系统性的研究,而实证研究的重要数据显示,已经被广泛接受的相关理论在实践中面临着质疑和规则适用冲突的挑战。

笔者立足于我国立法现状和司法实践,紧扣实证研究中发现的,与有过失法律规则本身以及规则被适用中存在的问题,结合数据分析、案例分析以及比较法上理论成果的借鉴,展开深入研究,批判性的指出实践中对于相关理论的理解误区,扬弃并创新性提出了与有过失法律规则体系化系统性建立、过失认定和“参与度”规则的完善、构建固定式与自由裁量式损失分配规则、明确多数人侵权的损害赔偿分配方法,以及非过失侵权中与有过失的适用规则建构等研究成果,反思了法官自由裁量权的行使原则,在一定程度上填补了国内相关研究领域的空白,实现了总结经验、发现问题、纠正谬误、创设规则的研究意义。

本文采取理论分析、文本分析、实证分析、比较分析的研究方法,以“法官们是如何理解与具体适用与有过失法律规则”为视角,立足于我国司法实践中与有过失法律规则的理解与适用现状,对司法裁判和规则适用的具体标准加以分析和建构,以期形成统一的、具有可预见性和可操作性的问题解决方案。希望研究成果能够进一步完善我国侵权法领域受害人过错责任制度,帮助法官们在审理此类案件中准确理解和适用法律规则,减少诉讼的不确定性风险,促进诉讼各方形成合理预期,实现公平与效率,以及法理、事理、情理的统一。
Thanks to the fast development of Chinese legal system over the past four decades, the legal principles of comparative negligence in the field of tort law have been significantly improved, thus forming a rather clear legislative pattern consisting of “general principles supplemented by specified rules”. From the general principles including Article 131 of General Principles of the Civil Law, Article 26 of Tort Law, and Article 1173 of Civil Code, to special rules set forth in special laws such as Road Traffic Safety Law and Product Quality Law, the relevant statutes have provided basic legal principles of comparative negligence that reduce or exempt the tortfeasor’s liability in the case of fault of the injured party.

However, as one of the most frequently used defenses in tort law, comparative negligence has not received due attention in legal theory and judicial practice. On one hand, there lacks in-depth and systematic research on the composition elements and apportionment of liability among the academic circle. On the other hand, empirical data point to a number of major challenges to some widely-accepted theories and conflicting application of comparative negligence rules in practice. Based on the current legislation and judicial practice in China, the author focuses on the problems found from empirical studies regarding the legal principles of comparative negligence and conflicting application thereof, and delves into these problems through data analysis and case analysis as well as comparative law study. The author sharply identifies the judicial misunderstanding of relevant rules, creatively proposes the establishment of systematic legal framework of comparative negligence, and critically examines the theory and practice of “the degree of causal contribution”. Moreover, the author suggests new approaches to damage apportionment including “fixed apportionment of damages” and “discretionary apportionment of damages”, clarifies the method of apportionment of damages for comparative negligence cases involving multi-tortfeasors, and constructs the rules of comparative negligence applicable to the tort claims based on strict liability. The findings of this dissertation have filled the gaps in relevant studies in China and therefore are of major significance in terms of experience drawing, problem identification, fallacy correction, and rule construction.

By adopting theoretical methodology, legal doctrinal methodology, empirical methodology, and comparative study, this dissertation, from the perspective of “how judges understand and apply the rule of comparative negligence”, analyzes and constructs the specific legal standards for adjudication and law application in handling case of comparative negligence. This research intends to provide unified, predictable, and operable legal solutions that can help judges more accurately understand and apply the legal principles of comparative negligence in the future, thus reducing the risk of uncertainty and inconsistency in adjudication and enhancing the disputing parties’ reasonable expectations. This will also help to achieve both fairness and efficiency, as well as the unity of legal, factual and emotive effects in tort litigation involving comparative negligence.

    Research areas

  • Comparative Negligence, Liability for Tort, Fault, the Degree of Causal Contribution, Apportionment of Damages, Strict Liability