工伤补偿与第三人侵权赔偿竞合探讨

发布时间：2019-02-28 20:57

【摘要】：劳动者因第三人的侵权行为受到伤害，该伤害又同时被认定为工伤的，会产生工伤补偿请求权与第三人侵权损害赔偿请求权的竞合。对如何处理该竞合关系，《工伤保险条例》未作出规定，《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》及《社会保险法》中虽有所提及，但也因相关条文规定不明而产生了说法不一的释义。多年来，理论界对此一直无法达成共识，而司法实践中同案不同判的例子更是屡见不鲜。本文从一则真实案例的讨论入手展开对此问题的分析。紧扣案情，，结合现有理论，同时与同类案例进行比较，以期对该案的法律适用问题是否恰当做出一个合理的判断，且就该争论的问题得到一个相对理性、正义的结论。本文除引言和结语外共分为三个部分。第一部分由争议案件的案情回顾和受理法院的审理情况，引出该案的主要焦点，即工伤补偿与第三人侵权赔偿竞合时如何处理二者之适用关系。在不存在侵权第三人的普通民事侵权领域，用人单位也应当依法承担雇主赔偿责任，但是由于雇主责任与工伤保险给付之间的关系处理已有明文规定，司法实践中裁判统一，因此本文主要探讨侵权第三人的赔偿责任与工伤保险补偿责任之间的关系。第二部分引介主要发达国家在处理工伤补偿与第三人侵权赔偿竞合问题上的立法规定，同时分析我国现行的法律、行政法规及司法解释中的相关规定，并着重介绍各省市对此竞合问题最新的地方法规及其在司法实践中对此类案件的具体判决结果，以此强调我国当前立法、司法不统一的现状，为下文提出竞合问题的解决方式从理论和实践层面做出铺垫。第三部分是本文的核心所在，首先对各学者所提出的理论模式进行评析，在博采众长的基础上对工伤补偿与第三人侵权赔偿两种请求权从功能和目的、补偿和赔偿项目以及补偿和赔偿金额三个方面进行深入分析，从而以最大限度保护受害职工利益、充分发挥两种制度的功能及实现两种请求权的融汇贯通为准绳，详细阐述了我国制度构建的最佳选择，即采取实体上的区分补充及程序上的分类规制。在实体层面上遵循区分补充原则，对工伤补偿和第三人侵权赔偿的具体项目进行区分，对于具有相同或相似性质的赔偿项目只允许受伤职工以就高原则获得赔偿，而对于两种赔偿所特有的项目，则允许受害职工兼得。在程序上采取分类规制的方式，对实践操作中可能出现的赔偿请求权行使情形分别予以规定，便于司法适用。从而得出该处理方式是我国处理工伤补偿和第三人侵权损害赔偿竞合问题之最佳选择的结论，并根据结论内容阐明对争议案件的看法。
[Abstract]:If the laborer is injured because of the infringement of the third party, and the injury is also recognized as an industrial injury, it will result in the competition of the right of claim for compensation for work injury and the right of claim for compensation for tort damage of the third party. The regulations on Industrial injury Insurance do not provide for how to deal with this competing relationship, the interpretation by the Supreme people's Court of certain issues concerning the applicable law for hearing cases of compensation for personal injury, and the Social Insurance Law, although mentioned in the Law on Social Insurance, But also because the relevant provisions are unclear and produce different interpretations of the law. For many years, the theoretical circle has been unable to reach a consensus on this, and in judicial practice, the examples of different sentences in the same case are not uncommon. This paper starts with the discussion of a real case to analyze this problem. In order to make a reasonable judgment on the application of the law in the case, the author tries to draw a rational and just conclusion on the question of the dispute, which is based on the existing theory and compares with the same kind of case in order to make a reasonable judgment on the application of the law in the case. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided into three parts. The first part reviews the case and the hearing of the court, which leads to the main focus of the case, that is, how to deal with the relationship between industrial injury compensation and third-party tort compensation. In the field of common civil tort where there is no tort third party, the employer should also bear the employer's liability for compensation according to law, but because the relationship between employer's liability and the payment of industrial injury insurance has been clearly stipulated, the adjudication is unified in judicial practice. Therefore, this paper mainly discusses the relationship between the liability of tort third party and the compensation liability of industrial injury insurance. The second part introduces the main developed countries in dealing with the industrial injury compensation and the third party tort compensation competition issues, at the same time analyzes the existing laws, administrative regulations and judicial interpretation of the relevant provisions of our country. It also focuses on introducing the latest local laws and regulations of the provinces and cities on this issue and the specific judgment results of such cases in judicial practice, in order to emphasize the current situation of legislation and judicial inconsistency in our country, For the following proposed competing problems from the theoretical and practical aspects of the solution to make the groundwork. The third part is the core of this article, first of all, the theoretical model put forward by the scholars is evaluated, on the basis of the extensive use of the public, the compensation for injury and the third party tort compensation from the two claims from the function and purpose, An in-depth analysis of the compensation and compensation items and the amount of compensation and compensation is carried out so as to maximize the protection of the interests of the injured staff and workers, give full play to the functions of the two systems and realize the convergence of the two kinds of claim rights as the criterion. This paper expounds the best choice of the system construction in our country, that is to say, to adopt the distinguishing supplement on the entity and the classification regulation in the procedure. Following the principle of distinction and complementarity at the substantive level, a distinction is made between specific items of compensation for industrial injury and compensation for third-party infringement, and for compensation items of the same or similar nature, only injured workers are allowed to receive compensation in respect of highlands, And for two kinds of compensation special items, the injured workers are allowed to have both. In order to facilitate the judicial application, the author adopts the classification regulation in the procedure, and prescribes the circumstances in which the right of claim for compensation may appear in the practical operation, which is convenient for the judicial application. Thus it is concluded that the treatment mode is the best choice to deal with the problems of industrial injury compensation and third party tort damages in China, and the views on disputed cases are expounded according to the content of the conclusion.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D922.55;D920.5

【参考文献】