工伤补偿制度:起源、问题与解决

社会化的工伤保险制度系因应工业社会中频发的工伤而产生,在一些国家是工伤补偿以禁止劳动者对雇主请求民事侵权赔偿为前提的,除第三人侵权情形外,我国亦是如此.但工伤补偿和民事侵权赔偿的差异,导致了两个方面的问题:劳动者无法获得充分赔偿和雇主对安全问题的懈怠,这要求工伤补偿与民事侵权赔偿之间的制度衔接.工伤补偿制度仅应适用于无过错责任,在雇主存在过错的情况下,应赋予劳动者独立的民事侵权责任求偿权,确立过错责任和无过错责任之间补充的关系.     

论公平责任一般条款及适用：对《侵权责任法》第24条的解读

《侵权责任法》第24条是公平责任的一般条款,应属于补偿责任范畴.公平责任解决的并非侵权行为和侵权责任问题.公平责任的适用条件是双方均无过错.适用第24条之时,应遵循类型化优先以防止向一般条款逃避的原则,同时应基于公平的立场着重考虑多种因素.公平责任未来更合理的走向是经由责任保险再逐步转向社会福利系统来承担对受害人的补偿责任.     

作为侵权法正当性基础的结果责任——以英美侵权法理论的发展为背景

进入二十世纪以后,随着社会保障体系和第三者责任保险的出现,以及无过错责任的日益壮大,传统侵权法面临前所未有的"危机",这也成为英美侵权法理论无法回避的问题。作为侵权法基础的结果责任的正当性问题由此被提出,而对其加以证明则有两种途径:一是通过对经济分析理论和矫正正义理论进行比较研究,为侵权法中的结果责任寻找适当的理论基础;二是通过对社会化保障体系的具体分析,从社会实践的角度为结果责任的正当性提供证明。通过对新西兰社会实践失败的原因进行分析,侵权法保障自由与正义实现的功能在理论层面获得肯定。     

人身侵权损害与死亡赔偿的制度理性

现代社会不断发生各种事故造成大量的人身及财产损害,针对这种现象构建良性的法律调整机制给人类智慧带来极大的挑战。我国目前正处于通过创制和健全相关民事立法——侵权责任法来积极应对各种事故导致人身与财产损害的关键时期。通过梳理我国现行人身侵权损害赔偿制度中分散多元多层级立法的大致脉络,提出生命的双重价值观命题以理性关照“同命同价”与“同命不同价”的热议,思考如何使侵权死亡赔偿范围及标准更趋于正当合理等问题,为完善我国相关立法略尽绵薄之力。     

A Study of Juror and Jury Judgments in Civil Cases: Deciding Liability for Punitive Damages

A study was conducted to investigate civil juries' decisions concerning defendants' liability for punitive damages in tort cases. A total of 121 six-member mock juries composed of jury-service-eligible citizens were presented summaries of previously decided cases and given a comprehensive instruction on the defendant's liability for punitive damages. Most of the mock juries decided that the consideration of punitive damages was warranted, although appellate and trial judges had concluded that they were not warranted. The tendency to find the defendant liable was partly due to jurors' failure systematically to consider the full set of legally necessary conditions for the verdicts they rendered. Individual differences in the jurors' backgrounds were not strongly related to their verdicts; income and ethnicity were weakly related to judgments. The social processes in deliberation on civil juries were similar to the dynamics of deliberation that have been observed in criminal juries.     

Inducing corporate compliance: A compound corporate liability regime

Corporate liability regimes have two major social goals: (i) inducing corporations to internalize all social ramifications of their activity; and (ii) inducing corporations to prevent, deter, and report their employee misconduct. The scholarly polemic has shown that none of the liability regimes recognized thus far in the literature efficiently satisfies both social goals. Following a Law and Economics approach, this paper develops an innovative regime that may comprise an optimal corporate liability framework in most settings. The Compound Corporate Liability Regime developed in this paper is a two-layer strict liability regime. Under this regime, corporations that self-report their employee misconduct incur a sanction that is reduced by the variable enforcement costs saved due to their self-reporting. Such a liability framework aligns social and corporations’ interests, and thereby satisfies both social goals of corporate liability regimes.     

论侵权预防责任对传统侵权法的挑战

便权预防责任是《便权责任法》创立的一种新型侵权贲任.比较法经验表明,该责任的出现是当代便权法之最新发展趋势.该责任对传统侵权贲任带来了巨大挑战,具体表现为:归责与归贲依据须重新界定,责任正当性基础遏然有别,构成要件与法律效果完全被颠覆等.回顾型的传统便权责任框架体系巴无法容纳前瞻型的侵权预防责任,故须扩容和革新,从而形成一种更具包容力的、适合未来发展的崭新侵权责任体系.     

Administrative compensation of medical injuries: a hardy perennial blooms again

Periods in which the costs of personal injury litigation and liability insurance have risen dramatically have often provoked calls for reform of the tort system, and medical malpractice is no exception. One proposal for fundamental reform made during several of these volatile periods has been to relocate personal injury disputes from the tort system to an alternative, administrative forum. In the medical injury realm, a leading incarnation of such proposals in recent years has been the idea of establishing specialized administrative "health courts." Despite considerable stakeholder and policy-maker interest, administrative compensation proposals have tended to struggle for broad political acceptance. In this article, we consider the historical experience of administrative medical injury compensation proposals, particularly in light of comparative examples in the context of workplace injuries, automobile injuries, and vaccine injuries. We conclude by examining conditions that may facilitate or impede progress toward establishing demonstration projects of health courts.     

侵权立法若干问题思考

侵权法应定名为侵权责任法而不是侵权行为法。侵权请求权应包括绝对权请求权,同时在法律适用上应理顺侵权损害赔偿请求权与绝对权请求权之间的关系。侵权法的归责原则具有"原则—规则"双重属性,是贯通侵权法内部体系和外部体系的枢纽。作为原则,归责原则应包括过错责任、无过错责任、过错推定责任和公平责任四元体系。作为法律规则,归责原则具有模糊性和具体性。最大限度的类型化是侵权责任立法的理想,采取"框架式全面类型化"即规定侵权必要类型并采取总分结构,是类型化的现实模式。     

Retroactive liability and the insurability of long-tail risks

This article focuses on a specific aspect of liability insurance that arises out of the latent nature of certain insured events. In particular, it is concerned with the fact that in the interval between the original tort and the claim for damages the standard of care applied by the courts may change. This is the problem of retroactive liability. The article begins by briefly reviewing the legal background to the retrospective application of liability rules. Then it formally addresses the question of how retroactive liability can be reconciled with the goals of tort law and whether retroactive liability is insurable.     

服务侵权责任是独立的质量侵权责任

服务侵权责任是一项独立的质量侵权责任。承担服务侵权责任的前提条件是服务存在缺陷,即服务经营者所提供的服务不符合保障人身、财产安全的要求,包括服务设计缺陷、服务指示缺陷和服务过程缺陷。服务侵权责任的归责原则应采取过借推定兼顾公平原则。服务侵权责任与产品责任、建筑侵权责任构成我国“三位一体”的质量侵权责任制度。     

The impact of court errors on liability sharing and safety regulation for environmental/industrial accidents

We focus in this paper on the effects of court errors on the optimal sharing of liability between firms and financiers, as an environmental policy instrument. Using a structural model of the interactions between firms, financial institutions, governments and courts we show, through numerical simulations, the distortions in liability sharing between firms and financiers that the imperfect implementation of government policies implies. We consider in particular the role played by the efficiency of the courts in jointly avoiding Type I (finding an innocent firm guilty of inappropriate care) and Type II (finding a guilty firm not guilty of inappropriate care) errors. This role is considered in a context where liability sharing is already distorted (when compared with first best values) due not only to the courts’ own imperfect assessment of safety care levels exerted by firms but also to the presence of moral hazard and adverse selection in financial contracting. There is also not congruence of objectives between firms and financiers on the one hand and social welfare maximization on the other. Our results indicate that an increase in the efficiency of court system in avoiding errors raises safety care level, thereby reducing the probability of accident, and allowing the social welfare maximizing government to impose a lower liability [higher] share for firms [financiers] as well as a lower standard level of care.     

侵权法归责原则的论争及其解析

侵权法归责是在某种事故损害出现之后,出于对无辜受害者不公正待遇的同情,从与事故损害有关联的当事人中间选择最为合适的责任承担者的一种努力.公平原则理应属于侵权法归责原则之一,当行为人的过错与责任比较而言显失公平时,需要公平原则予以矫正.侵权法对各归责原则的选择基于一系列与风险和损害相关联的参数,包括行为本身的社会价值、风险的可控程度、行为风险与利益的分布格局、事故造成的受益和损害分布格局和致害人过错与受害人损害的对比关系等.我国民法中的各项特殊侵权行为应依照上述参数重新确定其归责原则,对于本身既具有重要的社会价值又具有难以有效控制风险的行为,只有将收益者对受害者的赔偿看成是实施该行为的一个合法的前提才符合正义的要求.     

医疗损害责任评析

《侵权责任法》中关于医疗损害侵权责任的规定,明确了过错责任原则。过错判断标准,强调了“说明义务”和“知情同意”,提出有限度适用无过错责任原则,对规范医疗损害赔偿具有积极意义。同时对司法鉴定工作也提出了新的要求。需要司法鉴定行业积极应对。     

价值取向与历史演进——我国侵权法归责原则立法之选择

归责原则居于侵权法的核心地位.不同历史时期的不同社会需求导致了不同归责原则的出现.构建适应现代民法发展的侵权法归责原则体系是我国制定民法典面临的一大问题.我国侵权法归责原则应由过错责任、无过错责任与公平责任原则组成.     

Tort Law Culture: Image and Reality

This article highlights two contrasting images of tort. The first reflects the traditional portrayal of justice, depicting tort as an independent ‘natural’ system of rules of universal application forming the foundation of a just society. The second is more recent and relates to the perceived development of a damaging compensation culture. Focusing on personal injury litigation, we show how these portrayals differ from the reality of tort. In practice it is heavily influenced by institutional arrangements: the importance of both welfare provision and liability insurance is highlighted, and the effects of a ‘no‐win no‐fee’ claims market are examined. The operation of tort is very much affected by commercial interests and the economic demands of the institutions which surround it. Overall we conclude that the images of tort fail to reflect how the personal injury compensation system actually operates.     

Sovereign Immunity in an Economic Theory of Government Behavior

The Federal Tort Claims Act of 1946 put government on an equal footing in tort law with private individuals. It also provides a very broadly defined immunity for any public function of a discretionary nature. While economists argue that immunity does not minimize social costs, this analysis outlines a theoretically optimal mix of liability and immunity. Discretionary governmental policy must be immune as it establishes principles of government conduct. Tort liability then insures cost-minimizing policy execution. This theory of state behavior links a number of leading/controversial immunity cases that otherwise exhibit no consistent thought.     

教育机构侵权责任归责原则的理论争议与解析——以《侵权责任法》为中心

教育机构侵权责任的归责原则,是据以确定教育机构在无民事行为能力人、限制民事行为能力人在教育机构学习、生活期间遭受人身损害时,教育机构是否承担民事责任的根据和标准,对于妥善处理学生伤害事故,平衡教育机构与在校学生的民事权益具有指标性意义。过错责任原则是教育机构侵权责任的基础性归责原则,过错推定责任为例外、公平责任均为相应补充。     

风险社会下的大规模侵权与责任保险的适用

人类自身活动已成为现代社会风险的根本性来源,大规模侵权是风险社会的极端表现,传统侵权责任法的单一赔偿机制已不足以救助大规模侵权中的众多受害者,将责任保险运用于大规模侵权损害救济中,对于维护社会经济秩序稳定,构建和谐社会具有重要意义。大规模侵权责任保险的构建应在模式选择、责任保险范围、责任限额、保险费率以及风险防范等问题上进行合理设计。     

略论涉外产品责任的法律适用

涉外产品责任是一种特殊的涉外侵权责任。在法律适用方面,各国的规定不尽相同,较具代表性的有侵权行为地法、政府利益分析法、最密切联系原则以及原告选择法律、海牙产品责任法律适用条约等,各有利弊。我国现行法规关于涉外产品责任的法律适用,存在较多缺陷,亟需完善。