侵权责任能力问题研究

发布时间：2018-06-01 21:38

本文选题：侵权责任能力 + 过失客观化　；参考：《广西师范大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：在大陆法系国家的传统民法中,责任能力制度主要适用于侵权法,是侵权责任承担的基础。在我国现阶段,侵权责任能力问题似乎在渐渐走出我们的视线,对于我国侵权法来说,研究这个问题是有理论和现实意义的。首先,侵权责任能力在民法学的地位并未认识清楚,导致其丧失了独立地位,完全依附于民事行为能力或者民事权利能力。其次,在《侵权责任法》起草过程中,我国就该法是否规定民事主体的侵权责任能力问题展开了激烈讨论,最终立法机关否定了对侵权责任能力制度进行立法的必要性,但胡雪梅、郑永宽等教授认同侵权责任能力的必要性和使用价值,其言论也发人深省,外国和台湾地区认可了侵权责任能力的合理性,相对来说在这一方面比我国要完善的多,对于适合我国国情的部分,应予以吸收。本文的主要目的意在指出侵权责任能力在我国侵权法中的缺失,凸显侵权责任能力存在的必要性。再次,在司法实践中,我们有的法官为了方便了结案件,故意忽略侵权责任能力,采取注重司法救济,把财产变为侵权责任能力的唯一标准,这些因素都容易造成对侵权责任能力的淡化。理论上的困惑和司法实践中的一些问题都促使我们对侵权责任能力问题进行再思考。本文从最基本的问题以及《侵权责任法》立法时的一些争论入手,以期对侵权责仟能力制度进行全面探讨。本文打算从四个部分论述侵权责任能力存在的必要性及其合理性。第一部分讨论侵权责任能力概述,包括侵权责任能力的概念、性质、基本理论和价值四个方面,侵权责任能力的性质总给我们一种“模糊”的感觉,我们对其没有一个清晰的认识,我打算从与民事行为能力、民事权利能力和民事责仟能力三者的关系入手,剖析侵权责任能力性质的独立性。基本理论则是从法学理论角度分析自然人和法人两个民事主体。侵权责任能力的价值取向是以保护未成年人、完整体系和协调体系和维护私法自治三个方而来讨论。第二部分讨论侵权责任能力的判断标准,以比较法学的方法分析法国、德国、口木和意大利民法关于侵权责任能力判断标准的优劣。第三部分讨论我国侵权责任立法及其研究现状,首先对我国现行法进行评价,其次,重点分析我国民法典侵权法草案学者建议稿,我国现行立法和大多数专家否认侵权责任能力存在的必要性,少数专家肯定其合理性,笔者通过对支持者和反对者两方观点的分析,来找到双方争议的关键点,不外乎两个问题,其一,“过失客观化”问题,其二,司法现实问题,对这两个争论点进行分析解读,得出自己的观点,“过失客观化”和司法现实都不能成为淡化侵权责任能力的原因,进而得出侵权责任能力存在的必要性。第四部分提出完善侵权责任能力的建议,主要有二点意见,确定侵权责任能力的独立、侵权责任能力的判断标准及其具体构建、监护人责任和被监护人责任的严格区分。
[Abstract]:In the traditional civil law of the civil law countries, the responsibility system is mainly applied to the tort law, which is the basis of the tort liability. At the present stage of our country, the problem of tort liability seems to be gradually out of our sight. For the tort law of our country, it is of theoretical and practical significance to study this problem. The status of civil law has not been understood clearly, resulting in the loss of its independent status and entirely dependent on the capacity for civil or civil rights. Secondly, in the course of the drafting of the tort liability law, our country has discussed the issue of whether the law stipulates the tort liability of the civil subject, and the legislative organ denies the liability for tort. It is necessary for the capacity system to make legislation, but Hu Xuemei, Zheng Yongkuan and other professors agree with the necessity and use value of the tort liability ability. The theory of its speech is also thought-provoking. The foreign and Taiwan regions have recognized the rationality of the tort liability ability. In this respect, it is more perfect than our country and should be given to the part of the national conditions suitable for our country. The main purpose of this article is to point out the lack of tort liability in the tort law of our country and to highlight the necessity of the existence of tort liability. Again, in judicial practice, some of our judges, in order to easily settle the case, deliberately ignore the ability of tort liability, take the weight of judicial relief and turn property into the only ability of tort liability. One standard, these factors can easily lead to the weakening of the capacity for tort liability. The theoretical confusion and some problems in the judicial practice have prompted us to rethink the problem of tort liability. This article starts with the most basic problems and the dispute over the law of tort liability and legislation, with a view to carrying out the system of liability for tort liability. This article intends to discuss the necessity and rationality of the existence of tort liability from the four parts. The first part discusses the summary of the ability of tort liability, including the concept, nature, basic theory and value of tort liability, and the nature of the liability for tort is always a "fuzzy" feeling that we do not. With a clear understanding, I intend to analyze the independence of the nature of the capacity for tort liability from the relationship with the civil capacity, the capacity of civil rights and the capacity of the civil liability three. The basic theory is to analyze the two civil subjects of natural and legal persons from the perspective of legal theory. The value orientation of the ability to engage in the right of infringement of rights is to protect the underage. People, the complete system and the coordination system and the maintenance of private law autonomy three parties to discuss. The second part discusses the judgment standards of the ability of tort liability, and the method of comparative law analyses the advantages and disadvantages of France, Germany, the mouth wood and the civil law of Italy on the judgment of liability for tort liability. The third part discusses the legislation and research of tort liability in China and its research. First of all, we evaluate the current law of our country, secondly, focus on the analysis of the draft of the draft of the draft law of tort in the civil code of our national code. The current legislation and most experts in our country deny the necessity of the existence of tort liability, a few experts affirm its rationality. The author finds the dispute between the two sides through the analysis of the two views of the supporters and the opponents. The key point is no more than two problems. One, "objectification of negligence", the second, the judicial reality, analyses and interprets the two arguments, and draws his own point of view. The "objectification of negligence" and the judicial reality can not become the reason for the ability to weaken the tort liability, and then the necessity of the existence of the tort liability ability is obtained. Fourth parts are obtained. There are two suggestions to improve the ability of tort liability, which mainly include the independence of the ability of tort liability, the criterion for judging the ability of tort liability and its concrete construction, the strict distinction between the responsibility of the guardian and the responsibility of the guardian.
【学位授予单位】：广西师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923

【相似文献】