论乘客交通事故伤亡损害赔偿之诉的法律适用

司法实践中,客运途中因交通事故导致乘客伤亡,当事人以违约责任为诉由还是以侵权责任为诉由因适用标准不同导致赔偿数额相差悬殊常成为争议的焦点。乘客伤亡之损害赔偿责任原则上应按照《道路交通安全法》及《民法通则》等有关规定,由导致损害事由发生的责任者承担,在加害人不明的情况下由承运人先行承担补充赔偿责任。一方面,因为对绝对权的保护原则上系基于法律的规定而非当事人的选定或约定,责任竞合也不能在普通规范与特别规范之间产生;另一方面,《合同法》第113条第2款明确规定"经营者对消费者提供商品或者服务有欺诈行为的,依照《中华人民共和国消费者权益保护法》的规定承担损害赔偿责任。"因为,消费者要求适用《中华人民共和国消费者权益保护法》给予惩罚性赔偿的前提是经营者提供商品或者服务有欺诈之故意,显然,乘客交通事故伤亡损害事件中不存在这种欺诈的故意罪。

On the Legal Application of Liability for Compensation in Traffic Accident

In legal practice, if a passenger is injured or dead in traffic accident, the great disparity of comensation caused by applying different causes of action： one is liability for breach of contract, the other is liability for tort. The liability for compensation in principle shall be beared by those who caused the traffic accident, and if the principle is uncertain, the carrier shall bear the liability for compensation first. On the one hand, the principle of protecting imperium is based on the regulations of law not the assumpsit of the parties,and liability coincidence cannot be generated in common criterion or special criterion. On the other hand, paragraph 2 in article 113 of the Contract Law definitely prescribes that where a merchant engages in any fraudulent activity while supplying goods or services to a consumer, it is liable for the PRC on Protection of Consumer Rights. Therefore, the precondition damages in accordance with the Law of of punitive compensation requested bythe consumer is that the merchant has the tendency to be fraudulent.