医疗侵权举证责任研究

发布时间：2018-03-22 02:27

本文选题：医疗侵权　切入点：归责原则　出处：《郑州大学》2013年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：医疗侵权纠纷案件一直以来都是争论的焦点,随着对医务人员的人身侵害、对医院的打砸抢等现象的频繁发生,医患关系的紧张再次被公众所关注。在司法实践中,为什么在有法可依的情况下仍旧会出现不守法、不用法的现象?因为目前我国关于医疗侵权的法律、法规和司法解释之间相互冲突,前后矛盾。立法上的混乱在于理论上的不统一。本文主要研究医疗侵权的举证责任问题,关于医疗侵权案件我国长期以来其实是按照“谁主张、谁举证”的基本原则来进行处理,但《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》第4条第8款中规定了医疗侵权的“举证责任倒置”,《侵权责任法》的出台实际上又重新纠正了所有的医疗纠纷案件都要举证责任倒置的规定,大部分医疗纠纷仍旧要实行“谁主张、谁举证”的原则。那么出现立法上的混乱的原因就在于对于医疗侵权案件究竟应该适用何种归责原则还没有统一的定论。所以本文通过研究医疗侵权案件应该适用何种归责原则,进而分析医疗侵权案件应如何确定举证责任的分配。本文主要从以下几个部分进行分析：第一部分引言。本部分包括问题的提出,与问题相关的最新文献的整理以及本文采取的研究方法。第二部分是医疗举证责任的争论。本部分主要采取历史分析的方法梳理我国医疗侵权立法一直以来存在的争论,进而引出医疗侵权归责原则的争论、举证责任的争论。第三部分是侵权责任的归责原则与举证责任的关系。本部分主要包括归责原则的基本理论、举证责任的基本理论、举证责任分配的各种学说以及三种归责原则与举证责任的关系。第四部分是举证责任分配的域外比较。本部分主要通过比较美国法、德国法、日本法关于举证责任分配的有关制度来对我国的举证责任制度做以借鉴。第五部分是对不同医疗侵权类型的举证责任研究。本部分主要对医疗侵权纠纷进行分类,针对不同类型的医疗侵权分别规定不同的举证责任。
[Abstract]:Medical tort dispute cases have always been the focus of controversy. With the frequent occurrence of personal assault on medical personnel, smashing and looting of hospitals and other phenomena, the tension between doctors and patients has once again been concerned by the public. In judicial practice, Why is it that there is no need to obey the law when there are laws to abide by? Because at present, the laws, regulations and judicial interpretations of medical tort in our country conflict with each other and contradict each other. The confusion in legislation lies in the disunity of theory. This paper mainly studies the burden of proof of medical tort. With regard to medical tort cases in China, for a long time, in fact, it has been handled in accordance with the basic principle of "who claims, who gives proof". However, Article 4, paragraph 8, of the Supreme people's Court on evidence in Civil procedure provides for the "inversion of the burden of proof" in medical tort, and the enactment of the Tort liability Law actually corrects all medical disputes. In cases where the burden of proof is reversed, Most medical disputes still have to be "who claims," The reason for the confusion in legislation lies in the fact that there is still no unified conclusion on what kind of imputation principle should be applied to medical tort cases. Therefore, through the study of medical tort cases, this article should be appropriate. What kind of imputation principle is used, Then it analyzes how to determine the distribution of the burden of proof in medical tort cases. The first part is the introduction. This part includes the questions raised, the latest literature related to the problem and the research methods adopted in this paper. The second part is the argument of medical burden of proof. This part mainly adopts the method of historical analysis to sort out the debate that exists all the time in the legislation of medical tort in our country, and then leads to the controversy of the principle of imputation of medical tort and the dispute of burden of proof. The third part is the relationship between liability principle of tort liability and burden of proof. This part mainly includes the basic theory of imputation principle and the basic theory of burden of proof. Various theories of burden of proof and the relationship between three principles of imputation and burden of proof. The fourth part is the extraterritorial comparison of the distribution of the burden of proof. This part mainly compares the American law, the German law and the Japanese law on the distribution of the burden of proof to make reference to the system of the burden of proof in our country. The fifth part is the research on the burden of proof of different types of medical tort. This part mainly classifies the medical tort disputes and sets different burden of proof for different types of medical tort.
【学位授予单位】：郑州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923;D922.16

【参考文献】