侵权补充责任的理论基础探究简

侵权补充责任是我国法官在实践中探索的一种责任形态,在2003年的司法解释中得到首次确认.作为一种新型的责任形态,学界研究甚少,更勿提关于理论基础共识的形成.目前,学界在侵权补充责任的理论基础方面存在两种观点,即不真正连带责任说和广义请求权竞合说;但两种观点并非尽善尽美,难以从全面、科学的角度阐释侵权补充责任.在综合分析比较的基础上,安全保障义务理论和原因力理论则在诠释侵权补充责任方面更具说服力.安全保障义务理论是我国对德国法中社会安全交往义务理论的继受,该理论为不作为行为的间接侵权承担责任提供了佐证,从而为侵权补充责任的适用奠定了理论前提.同时,原因力理论在我国的实践中越发得到重视,特别是在第三人和安全保障义务人的责任分析中,责任分担形态空白的出现为适用侵权补充责任留下了空间.由此,在社会管理创新和呼吁重视本土法治资源的情境下,契合法官的政策选择,补充责任就进入了侵权领域,成为新型的责任形态.

Explorating the Theoretical Basis of Tort Supplementary Liability

Tort supplementary liability is a new form of responsibility that is firstly applied into practice by the judge in 2003. As a new type of responsibility form, few academic research, not mention about reaching a consensus in the theoretical basis. At present, the academia in tort compensatory responsibility in basic theory of the two kinds of views, that is not really joint liability and generalized a usual; But two viewpoints are not perfect, it is difficult to explan the tort supplementary liability by the perspective of the comprehensive and scientific way. On the basis of comprehensive analysis and comparison, the safety guarantee obligation theory and reason theory is more convincing in interpretation of tort supplementary liability. Our country accept German law theory of security obligation , which provides the evidence for the indirect infringement behavior responsibility and leads the tort compensatory liability applicable. At the same time ,the academia pays increasingly attention to the reason theory, especially in the third person and the safety guarantee obligation responsibility analysis, blank appears to apply to tort liability form of supplementary liability.Thus, in the social management innovation and calls attention to local law resources situation, agree with the policy choices of the judge, added into the field of tort liability, it becomes the new form of responsibility.