空难事故案例若干法理问题研究

空难事故中的概括性死亡金包括被扶养人生活费、精神损害赔偿与单纯的(狭义的)死亡赔偿等内容,应主要和优先用于被扶养人生活费之满足。在有剩余时依次作为精神损害赔偿金与单纯死亡赔偿金,且后者可作为遗产继承。     

被扶养人生活费赔偿制度的适用与完善

扶养人生活费作为人身损害赔偿的重要项目,对于残疾(死亡)赔偿金具有一定从属性,司法解释将其纳入残疾(死亡)赔偿金范畴并无不妥但是,被扶养人生活费赔偿项目具有无可替代的作用,将其在残疾(死亡)赔偿金中予以单列十分必要,且按照司法解释的设计,被扶养人生活费与残疾(死亡)赔偿金累加计入赔偿总额并不会导致侵权人重复赔偿问题就审判实践而言,对被扶养人生活费赔偿制度有必要进一步加以改革和完善,主要是适格被扶养人的范围应予适度调整、被扶养人生活费的请求权行使主体应予适当扩大、被扶养人生活费的起算时间应与误工费的计发期间相协调.     

被扶养人生活费的计算问题

在受害人残疾或死亡的情形下,被扶养人生活费应当单独计算并计入残疾赔偿金或者死亡赔偿金。被扶养人为数人时,各被扶养人生活费年赔偿总额的上限是受诉法院所在地上一年度城镇居民人均消费支出额。如各被扶养人生活费年赔偿总额未超过上限,则被扶养人生活费年赔偿总额即为多份被扶养人生活费之和,如已超过上限,则被扶养人生活费年赔偿总额即为受诉法院所在地上一年度城镇居民人均消费性支出额。     

侵权死亡赔偿研究

侵权责任法无法也没有必要对死者或者死亡本身进行救济。作为民事责任方式的赔偿，只能是对死者近亲属财产损失和精神损害的救济，在制度上则体现为对死者近亲属相关财产损失的赔偿、精神损害的赔偿以及对被扶养人合理生活费的赔偿和死亡赔偿金。应以“维持被扶养人或者近亲属一定的物质生活水平（物质生活水平维持说）”修正“扶养丧失说”和“继承丧失说”作为被扶养人生活费和死亡赔偿金的理论基础。     

侵权责任法实施后原告能否主张被扶养人生活费?

Q编辑同志:根据最高人民法院《关于适用侵权责任法若干问题的通知》第4条规定,人民法院适用侵权责任法审理民事纠纷案件,如受害人有被扶养人的,应当依据最高人民法院《关于审理人身损害赔偿案件适用法律若干问题的解释》第28条的规定,将被扶养人生活费计入残疾赔偿金或死亡赔偿金。对此规     

人身权损害赔偿案件中受害人于诉讼中死亡时的赔偿数额的计算方法分析

损害赔偿案件中,如受害人在起诉要求损害赔偿前或在赔偿案件审理过程中,已因其他原因正常死亡,则受害人的残疾赔偿金、被扶养人生活费的赔偿年限应计算至受害人死亡日止。同时,精神损害抚慰金的请求权如不存在例外情形,也不应发生继承。     

论我国《侵权责任法》上的死亡赔偿制度——兼谈对《侵权责任法》第16、17、18条和第22条的理解

我国《侵权责任法》所确立的死亡赔偿在性质上是对死者近亲属或被扶养人的财产损失补偿和精神抚慰,赔偿项目包括死亡赔偿金(物质性损害赔偿)、抚慰金(精神损害赔偿)和丧葬费,死亡赔偿金的赔偿标准是参考死者生前的收入和被扶养人的扶养费。     

侵权死亡赔偿制度探究

侵权死亡赔偿制度是当事人维护合法权益的重要法律依据,是法院公正裁判的重要标尺。只有不断完善侵权死亡赔偿制度,明确赔偿项目,明确死亡赔偿金和被扶养人生活费及精神损害抚慰金的相互关系、统一赔偿标准,才能有效避免司法实践中产生的各种矛盾冲突,维护法治公平正义,实现社会和谐稳定。     

涉外民事侵权损害赔偿纠纷的法律适用和赔偿标准

【裁判要旨】在我国境内发生的涉外民事侵权行为所产生的侵权赔偿纠纷应当适用中国法律,对于外国人在我国境内遭受人身损害所产生的死亡赔偿金和被扶养人生活费之赔偿标准问题,鉴于受诉法院所在地标准与国外当事人住所地或者经常居住地标准两     

天坛医院“号贩子”老大被判刑

备受关注的北京南二环奥拓撞人案，2005年12月5日终审宣判。北京市第一中级法院判决奥拓车司机刘寰一次性赔偿死者家属吴军发等四人急救费、运尸费、丧葬费、死亡赔偿金、交通费、住宿费、被扶养人生活费、精神损害抚慰金等共计10万余元。刘寰反诉请求死者家属赔偿其修车费得到法院支持，刘寰终审获赔修车费664元。     

知识产权侵权惩罚性赔偿数额的司法确定问题研究

《中华人民共和国民法典》第1185条以一般规则的形式宣示我国知识产权侵权惩罚性赔偿制度的全面确立。抓紧落实惩罚性赔偿是知识产权司法面临的重大课题,惩罚性赔偿数额的确定是其中的主要问题。基数难以确定,倍数的确定缺乏统一标准,法定赔偿滥用,惩罚性赔偿、法定赔偿、酌定赔偿适用混乱,地方性裁判指南规定的数额标准不一致导致"类案不同判"等,都是当前损害赔偿数额确定中的问题。为解决上述问题,建议以权利人的实际损失为准确定惩罚性赔偿的基数,侵权获利或者许可使用费倍数作为对权利人实际损失的推定;明确实际损失的构成,在损失计算方法上适当借鉴域外经验;统一侵权获利的确定标准,同时考虑技术分摊问题;明确许可使用费的合理倍数可以作为惩罚性赔偿的基数,明确许可使用费确定时的考量因素;惩罚性赔偿的基数不应包括权利人制止侵权所支付的合理开支;酌定赔偿可以作为惩罚性赔偿的基数;满足一定条件情况下的法定赔偿可以作为惩罚性赔偿的基数。综合考虑刑事罚金、行政罚款、惩罚性赔偿的关系。出台司法解释、发布指导性案例,规范地方法院裁判惩罚性赔偿案件数额标准不一致的情形。     

精神损害之界定

明确精神损害的范围是确定精神损害赔偿数额的基础。各国确定精神损害范围的标准各异：在英美法中，凡造成被侵害人精神痛苦，即构成精神损害；大陆法则以寻找并确定侵权客体为进路，将非财产损失作为精神损害的范围，日本还将非财产损失作为法人精神损害的依据。其实，精神损害的确定应以受害人生理、心理（或精神）上的痛苦为标准，故法人不适用精神损害赔偿，精神损害赔偿的功能也仅以抚慰为主。     

论恶意抵押

恶意抵押指有多个普通债权人的债务人仅与债权人之一设定抵押 ,以减少债务人的一般担保 ,而侵害其他债权人的利益的抵押。恶意抵押是债权人的撤销权的客体 ,因此可以被其他债权人撤销。恶意抵押中抵押人的法定代表人或直接责任人需要对受害人承担民事赔偿责任。     

The Principle of Full Compensation in Tort Law

According to the principle of full compensation, tort law seeks to put the victim in the position he was in before the tort. This position is generally considered to be the situation where the victim does not suffer any harm at all. We consider an alternative interpretation. If an injurer takes due care, the victim is faced with expected harm. This can be considered the victim's expected harm in the situation he was in before the tort. Thus conceived full compensation requires a negligent injurer to pay damages which bring the (potential) victim ex ante in the same position as the victim was in the case where the (potential) injurer takes due care. We investigate the consequences of this restated negligence rule. For due care levels larger than efficient care, the standard negligent rule may lead to excessive care, whereas the restated negligent rule always leads to efficient care. Furthermore, the activity level under the restated negligent rule is greater than the activity level under the standard negligent rule, which itself is greater than the efficient activity level. Social welfare under the restated negligence rule can either be higher or lower than social welfare under the standard negligence rule.     

从比较法的角度看我国惩罚性赔偿制度的必要性

惩罚性赔偿金是英美法上的一项重要制度,具有损害填补、惩罚被告的作用,而德、法等大陆法系国家奉行单纯的补偿性民事责任制度,排斥对于惩罚性赔偿金合法性的认同。我国最早在《消费者权益保护》第49条对其加以规定,取得较好的社会效果,然而2009年颁布的《侵权责任法》并未将惩罚性赔偿原则写入总则,而是局限于产品责任之中。因此,完善惩罚性赔偿金制度有其必要性,通过对惩罚性赔偿制度的介绍以及英美法规定的研习,对我国惩罚性赔偿制度提出建议。     

Reconstruction of a real car-pedestrian-accident. Part I: Generating an individual digital topographic image of the victim

The aim of forensic biomechanics is the reconstruction of traumatic events based on the pathological findings in the victim's morphology, the accident traces and the car damages. The use of forensic documentation tools (e.g. Streifenlichttopometrie) enables 3-dimensional and proportional accurate documentation of the victim's body, of its injuries and of the car damages with submillimeter precision. The generated topographic image serves as input for a multi-body system model of the victim. It allows further to determine exactly the contact points between car and victim for a computer simulated dynamical reconstruction of the impact situation. In the case of an accident involving a car and a pedestrian the generation and application of computer aided 3-dimensional reconstruction models are shown.     

恢复性司法相关理论问题探析

违法行为不仅伤害了受害人,而且破坏了社区的秩序。恢复性司法强调通过道歉、赔偿、社区服务等方式使受害人因违法行为作造成的物质损失得到赔偿,使受害人因犯罪受影响的生活恢复常态,同时亦使违法行为人通过积极的负责任的行为重新融入社区,并赢得受害人及其家庭和社区成员的谅解。因此,厘清其相关基础理论问题于构建和谐社会的司法背景有重要的实践意义。     

Economic impact of Wicks v State Rail Authority (NSW) (2010) 84 ALJR 497

In Wicks v State Rail Authority (NSW) (2010) 84 ALJR 497 the High Court of Australia held that, among other things, plaintiffs (who establish that they suffer a recognised psychiatric illness as a result of the breach of duty of care owed to them by the defendant under s 32 of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW)) are entitled to recover damages for pure mental harm under s 30 if their psychiatric injury arose "wholly or partly from" a "series of shocking experiences" in the form of "a sudden and disturbing impression on the mind and feelings" in connection with witnessing at the scene "another person ('the victim') being killed, injured or put in peril by the act or omission of the defendant". The High Court construed the phrase "being ... injured or put in peril" to include plaintiffs who suffer pure mental harm by witnessing at the scene another person being injured through the process of suffering pure mental harm in the form of psychiatric injury occasioned by the defendant's negligent act or omission. The Wicks decision raises the question whether the expanded liability of defendants for pure mental harm is economically sustainable.     

A revised model of unilateral accidents

This paper suggests and justifies a revised formulation of the unilateral accident model based on relaxing two assumptions of the standard model: the precaution function and the harm function. The revised model is, therefore, more general and corresponds better to various situations. A resulting trait of the generalized model is its account for the interaction between the injurer’s care and activity levels, which was implicitly assumed away so far. The revised model is examined using a few standard issues in tort and the analysis brings new results and insights for the unilateral accident case. For example, the view that, under a negligence regime, due care can be defined regardless of the optimal level of activity holds under very restrictive assumptions. In general, due care must be defined simultaneously with the optimal activity level. In addition, the common view suggests that underestimation of the level of actual damages under strict liability would induce injurers to take insufficient care and to engage excessively in a risky activity (and vice versa, for overestimation). This paper shows that underestimation of actual damages may counter-intuitively lead to insufficient activity or excessive care levels. Similarly, the results of underestimating harm under a negligence regime prove to be different than commonly thought. In addition, the revised model questions the intuitive similarity between the underestimation of harm and the judgment-proof problem, and provides some new results for the latter problem.     

宠物之人格物化及其所涉精神损害赔偿问题研究

在侵权法发展史上,精神损害赔偿原本不具有救济财产损害的功能。但随着社会经济的不断发展,人类文明的不断进步,人们在更加注重财产为人类带来物质利益的同时,也会不断地将情感、尊严、人格等基本的人格利益融于物或财产中,由此更加注重精神感受和精神利益。《最高人民法院关于确定民事侵权精神损害赔偿责任若干问题的解释》规定了具有人格象征意义的特定纪念物品因侵权行为而永久性灭失或毁损,其所有人可以请求精神损害赔偿。此条规定虽然是一种巨大进步,但笔者认为该规定所涉财产权客体仍显狭隘。当今社会,宠物(特别是狗类与猫类)与人类的感情愈加紧密,并很多情况下成为家庭一员。其虽不是"特定纪念品",但其所承载的人类感情、精神寄托等人格利益却不容忽视。故本文意在讨论宠物因侵权行为致死所引起的其主人精神损害赔偿问题。