合同法视角下旅游经营者民事责任探析

发布时间：2018-03-09 18:55

本文选题：旅游经营者　切入点：民事责任　出处：《吉林大学》2013年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：我国旅游业呈现出快速发展的趋势，但是由此产生的旅游者与旅游经营者之间的纠纷也日益增多，而我国相关的立法并不完善。本文围绕着旅游经营者的民事责任展开研究。笔者认为旅游合同是指旅游经营者向旅游者提供旅游服务，双方因此明确相互权利义务关系的协议，是一种新的独立的合同类型。旅游经营者的民事责任包括缔约过失和违约责任等。其中，旅游经营者的缔约过失责任可以基于旅游经营者不具备法定的资格以及旅游经营者的欺诈产生。就旅游经营者的违约责任而言，可分为因旅游经营者自身的原因导致的违约以及因旅游辅助服务者导致的违约。同时，笔者还探讨了旅游经营者擅自转让旅游业务致使旅游者遭受损害导致的违约以及旅游经营者对于旅游者安全保障义务的违反的问题。当然，本文论述的重点是旅游经营者违约的精神损害赔偿责任、时间浪费损害赔偿责任以及欺诈的惩罚性赔偿责任。就旅游经营者违约的精神损害赔偿责任而言，我国立法否认旅游者可以基于违约主张旅游经营者的精神损害赔偿责任。但这是不合理的。首先，采取责任竞合的方式是不利于充分有效的维护旅游者的利益。其次，存在着旅游经营者并没有侵权的行为，而仅仅存在着违约的行为导致旅游者产生严重的精神损害的情况。最后，确立旅游经营者违约的精神损害赔偿责任对于旅游经营者并不存在不公平。因为旅游者旅游的目的是为了娱乐，在旅游的过程当中产生了旅游者的精神利益，旅游经营者对于其违约行为可能产生的对于旅游者精神利益的损害是可以预见也是应当预见的，所以并不违反违约损害赔偿的可预见性规则。笔者认为该责任有以下构成要件：旅游经营者必须存在着违约行为，旅游者遭受了比较严重的精神损害，违约行为与精神损害之间存在着因果关系以及旅游经营者具有过错。就旅游经营者的时间浪费损害赔偿责任而言，我国立法也没有做出规定。笔者认为应当确立此种责任。该责任有以下几个构成要件：旅游经营者存在着违约行为；旅游者浪费了时间以及旅游经营者具有过错。同时，，笔者认为可以参照台湾地区的做法规定旅游者就每日的时间浪费以不超过旅游经营者所收旅游费用总额每日平均之数额为限，这样也不会导致旅游经营者承担过重的责任。当然，旅游经营者的时间浪费损害赔偿责任与精神损害赔偿责任是并行不悖的。就旅游经营者欺诈的惩罚性赔偿责任而言，最高院规定：旅游经营者提供服务时有欺诈行为，旅游者请求旅游经营者双倍赔偿其遭受的损失的，人民法院应予支持。笔者认为该责任有以下几个构成要件：旅游经营者存在欺诈行为，旅游经营者主观上需要具有故意，旅游者因旅游经营者的欺诈而为错误的意思表示。最后，笔者分析了旅游经营者民事责任的免责事由，包括法定和约定两种。法定的免责事由又包括不可抗力，意外事件，旅游者自身的过错和第三人的行为。
[Abstract]:China's tourism industry showing a trend of rapid development, but between the tourists and tourism operators disputes are increasing, and the relevant legislation in our country is not perfect. This paper focuses on the civil liability of the tourism operators to launch the research. The author thinks that the travel contract refers to the tourism operators to provide travel services to tourists, so the two sides clear mutual rights and obligations of the agreement, is a new type of independent contract.
The civil liability of the tourism operators including contracting negligence and breach of responsibility. Among them, the tourism operators contractingfault liability can have a tour operator does not have legal qualifications and tourism operators. Based on fraud operators' liability for breach of contract, breach of contract can be divided into reasons for tourism operators of their own and breach of contract caused by tourism ancillary services the. At the same time, the author also discusses the tourism operators unauthorized transfer of tourism business in tourists suffered damage caused by breach of contract and tourism operators in violation of the security obligations of tourists.
Of course, the emphasis of this article is on the liability for compensation for mental damage of the tour operators, the compensation liability for time waste and the punitive liability of fraud.
The mental damage compensation liability for breach of tour operators, tourists can deny our legislation of compensation for spiritual damages based on breach of contract claimtourism operators responsibility. But it is not reasonable. Firstly, take the liability concurrence way is not conducive to fully and effectively safeguard the interests of tourists. Secondly, there is no infringement and tour operators the behavior, but only there is a breach of contract caused severe spiritual damage to tourists. Finally, the establishment of mental damage compensation for breach of tour operators of tourism operators does not exist unfair. Because tourist'stravel purpose is to entertain, resulting in a tour of the spirit interest in tourism process, for the spirit of the interests of tourists tourism operators may have damage for its breach is predictable and should be predictable, so not illegal The damages for breach of the foreseeability rule. The author thinks that this liability has the following elements: tourism operators must exist in the breach, tourists suffered serious mental damage, mental damage between breach of contract and there is a causal relationship and tourism operators have the mistake.
You waste time damage compensation liability of the tourism operators, China's legislation did not make provisions. The author believes that we should establish such liability. This liability has the following elements: tourism operators exist breach; tourist waste of time and the tourism operator has fault. At the same time, the author thinks that can refer to the practice of Taiwan area tourism regulations who will waste the time of day with no more than the tour operator received the total travel cost the average daily amount is limited, this will not lead to tourism operators assumesoverweight responsibility. Of course, the waste time damage tourism operators liability for compensation and spiritual damages is run parallel.
On the punitive damages of tour operators in terms of the fraud, the Supreme Court Rules: tourism operators to provide services of fraud, tourists canrequest tourism operators double compensation for the losses, the people's court shall support. The author thinks that this liability has the following elements: tourism operators fraud, tourism operators subjective need deliberately, tourists for tourism operators for fraud and wrong meaning.
Finally, the author analyzes the exemption reasons of the civil liability of tour operators, including two kinds of statutory and contractual terms. The statutory exemption includes force majeure, accident, tourist's own fault and third party's behavior.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923.6

【参考文献】