触电损害赔偿责任性质研究

依据《侵权责任法》颁布前的有关法律法规及司法解释,高压输电线路产权归属一直被各地法院作为确认高压触电损害赔偿责任主体的依据。其实质是将此类损害赔偿责任视为物件致害责任。《侵权责任法》第73条虽然作出了与以前的法律法规不一样的规定,将此类责任定性为高度危险作业致人损害责任,但是其颁布后,该法规定的意旨和精神却没有得到很好的贯彻和落实。其原因在于,不论是实务界还是理论界,均没有真正明确触电赔偿责任的性质,也没有弄清这两种责任定性的本质区别所在。基于此,实有必要对触电赔偿责任的性质进行细致研究并予以明确,对这两种责任定性孰优孰劣进行权衡比较,以真正落实《侵权责任法》第73条之立法意旨及精神。

Essence of Compensatory Liability in an Electric Shock

Under the laws and judicial interpretations before enactment of the Tort Liability Act,ownership of high-tension transmission line was always held by the courts as the main element in determining who was liable for the person suffered in a high-tension electric shock,the essence of which lay in treating the compensatory liability in an electric shock as one for injury caused by rem.While Article 73 of the Tort Liability Act differs from the previous laws and takes the liability as one occurring out of or pertaining to highly dangerous operational activities,the legislative intention and spirit has not been well understood,even less carried out,the reason of which lies in that neither in logic or in practice,the essence of the compensatory liability in an electric shock or the difference between the two kinds of treatments has been explicitly observed or understood.As such it worthwhile here to have a detailed study on the essence of the compensation liability in an electric shock and to compare the two sorts of treatments so as to accurately grasp the legislative intention and spirit of Article 73 of the Tort Liability Act.