侵权案件中因果关系的新实践

因果关系是侵权责任的构成要件之一,早在古罗马时代,在侵权行为法的归责领域中的地位就已确立.在一个多世纪不断探索中,各国法学家在因果关系的研究中建立了大量的有益理论.英美法系对因果关系的认定采取的是两分法思维程序,即从事实上原因和法律上原因进行分析;而大陆法系将因果关系分割成若干相对简单的次级问题,各个击破,即从"条件说"和"充分原因说"予以确认.各个理论学说都有其合理性和历史性,我们应该予以批判吸收.在我国因果关系理论和法律尚不完备的情况下,笔者依据有关因果关系的理论,在审判实践中进行有益尝试,从因果关系上解决了损害赔偿中遇到的一些疑难问题.无论英美法系或大陆法系的理论对我们仍然具有指导价值,应该予以借鉴.

New Practice of Causality in Case of Tort

Causality is an important constructing condition to the tort obligation. As early as ancient Rome, its position was established in the field of imputation in the law of tort. During the process of continuous explosion for over a century, jurists have established a great number of beneficial theories in the research of causality. The common law system applies one-dividing-into-two thinking procedure to the determination of causality, that is, it gives such analysis as is based on either factual reason or legal reason. While the civil law system divides it into many relatively simple parts and solves each at one time, that is, it decided causality by using "the theory of condition" and "the theory of adequate reason". Each theory is reasonable and based on its history. We should absorb them critically. In China, where the theories and laws of causality are not complete, the writer gives a beneficial attempt in trial practice based on the theory of causality and solved some difficult problems in cases of damages by wring it. We all know that the theories of both the common law system and the common law system are valuable to us and we should use them for reference.