自甘冒险独立性之否定研究

发布时间：2018-05-31 20:47

本文选题：自甘冒险 + 过失相抵　；参考：《大连海事大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：自甘冒险的相关规则自十八世纪被确立以来,在侵权法领域一直占据着重要的地位。但从二十世纪中期开始,自甘冒险在各国的地位逐渐式微,很多学者和法官认为其不再适宜作为一项独立的抗辩事由存在于侵权法中,自此,关于自甘冒险的存废以及其独立性的有无争议不断。目前我国对于自甘冒险并没有明确的法律规定,而司法实践中的很多法官却引用了自甘冒险规则予以裁判,因此对自甘冒险规则进行研究十分必要。我国关于自甘冒险规则的研究相对较少,纵观各学者发表的相关文章以及博士、硕士毕业论文,可以发现认为自甘冒险具有独立性的呼声很高,但是在我国2009年颁布、2010年实施的《侵权责任法》中,立法者并未采纳众多学者将自甘冒险规则纳入侵权法的建议。笔者在对自甘冒险的规则研究后,认为立法者的做法是正确的。本文的正文分五部分：第一部分,自甘冒险的厘清,从自甘冒险的定义、自甘冒险的元素分析以及自甘冒险的类型三个方面对自甘冒险相关规则作了简要介绍；第二部分,自甘冒险在各国的演化,讲述了自甘冒险在美国、德国、法国、日本四个国家的历史演化及现状,再对自甘冒险在我国的概况进行了分析；第三部分,自甘冒险独立性分析,在探讨了自甘冒险与过失相抵以及注意义务的关系后,认为自甘冒险并非一项独立的抗辩事由,否定了自甘冒险在侵权法中的独立地位；第四部分,我国引入自甘冒险之否定,评述了我国现有引入自甘冒险的学者建议,得出了我国不宜引入自甘冒险的结论；第五部分,通过文章前四部分的层层分析,得出最后结论：自甘冒险不具有独立性,我国应当完善其它相关规则使侵权法的功能得到更好的体现。
[Abstract]:Since the establishment of the rules of risk-taking in the eighteenth century, it has been playing an important role in the field of tort law. Since the mid-twentieth century, however, since the gradual decline in the status of risk-taking in various countries, many scholars and judges have considered that it is no longer appropriate for it to exist as an independent defence in tort law, and since then, There is a constant debate about the survival of self-risk and its independence. At present, there are no clear legal provisions for self-risk taking in our country, but many judges in judicial practice have cited the rules of self-risk-taking to judge, so it is very necessary to study the rules of self-risk-taking. There are relatively few studies on the rules of self-risk-taking in our country. If we look at the relevant articles published by various scholars, as well as the doctoral and master's thesis, we can find that there is a strong demand for independence of self-risk-taking. However, in the tort liability law enacted in China in 2009 and implemented in 2010, the legislator did not adopt the suggestion of many scholars to incorporate the self-risk rule into the tort law. After studying the rules of risk-taking, the author thinks that the legislator's practice is correct. The text of this paper is divided into five parts: the first part, the definition of self-risk-taking, the element analysis of self-risk-taking and the types of self-risk-taking are briefly introduced. This paper describes the historical evolution and current situation of self-risk taking in the United States, Germany, France and Japan, and then analyzes the general situation of self-willing risk-taking in China. After discussing the relationship between self-risk-taking, negligence offset and duty of care, the author thinks that self-risk-taking is not an independent defense, and denies the independent position of self-risk-taking in tort law. In this paper, the author comments on the suggestions of the present scholars who introduce self-risk, and draws the conclusion that it is not appropriate for China to introduce self-risk, the fifth part, through the layer by layer analysis of the first four parts of the article, comes to the conclusion that self-risk-taking is not independent. Our country should perfect other relevant rules to better reflect the function of tort law.
【学位授予单位】：大连海事大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923

【参考文献】