本文選題：輸血致害責(zé)任　切入點(diǎn)：舉證規(guī)則　出處：《法學(xué)論壇》2015年05期

【摘要】：《侵權(quán)責(zé)任法》第54、58條關(guān)于醫(yī)療侵權(quán)責(zé)任舉證規(guī)則的規(guī)定,未涉及推定因果關(guān)系,將推定過(guò)錯(cuò)限制于三類情形,弱化了《證據(jù)規(guī)定》開始采納的舉證責(zé)任倒置規(guī)則的影響�；趯�(duì)輸血致害責(zé)任領(lǐng)域140個(gè)典型案例樣本的分析,發(fā)現(xiàn)《侵權(quán)責(zé)任法》弱化舉證責(zé)任倒置規(guī)則的舉措未對(duì)輸血致害責(zé)任司法實(shí)踐產(chǎn)生實(shí)質(zhì)性影響。這與立法條文本身設(shè)置、未充分考慮司法實(shí)踐意見(jiàn)及規(guī)范性文件效力位階混亂有關(guān),與采血輸血的專業(yè)性及致害的嚴(yán)重性也不無(wú)關(guān)聯(lián)。未來(lái)法律解釋應(yīng)充分考慮輸血致害的特性及司法實(shí)踐對(duì)舉證責(zé)任倒置的態(tài)度,以更好地平衡患者與醫(yī)療機(jī)構(gòu)之間的利益。
[Abstract]:Article 5458 of the Tort liability Law does not deal with the presumption of causality, which limits the presumption of fault to three types of cases, and weakens the influence of the rule of inversion of the burden of proof that has been adopted in the provision of evidence.Based on the analysis of 140 typical cases in the field of blood transfusion injury liability, it is found that the act of weakening the rule of inversion of the burden of proof in the Tort liability Law has no substantial effect on the judicial practice of blood transfusion injury liability.This has something to do with the legislative provisions themselves, not taking full account of judicial opinions and normative documents, the confusion of the effectiveness of documents, and the professional nature of blood transfusion and the severity of harm caused by blood transfusion.In the future legal interpretation should take into account the characteristics of blood transfusion injury and the attitude of judicial practice to the reversal of the burden of proof in order to better balance the interests between patients and medical institutions.
【作者單位】： 華東政法大學(xué)科學(xué)研究院;
【基金】：上海市社科規(guī)劃課題一般課題《輸血感染病毒侵權(quán)責(zé)任實(shí)證研究——以上海;河南為研究對(duì)象》(2014BFX009)階段性成果
【分類號(hào)】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 楊元海;論我國(guó)司法解釋的法律地位與效力[J];遼東學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年05期

2 胡學(xué)軍;;解讀無(wú)人領(lǐng)會(huì)的語(yǔ)言——醫(yī)療侵權(quán)訴訟舉證責(zé)任分配規(guī)則評(píng)析[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2011年03期

3 王利明;論舉證責(zé)任倒置的若干問(wèn)題[J];廣東社會(huì)科學(xué);2003年01期

4 張家勇;;探索司法案例研究的運(yùn)作方法[J];法學(xué)研究;2012年01期

5 蔡新華;唐榮才;項(xiàng)漢城;;從輸血醫(yī)療糾紛案件中的舉證責(zé)任倒置看血站業(yè)務(wù)檔案管理的重要性[J];臨床輸血與檢驗(yàn);2011年03期

6 葉名怡;;醫(yī)療侵權(quán)責(zé)任中因果關(guān)系的認(rèn)定[J];中外法學(xué);2012年01期

7 孔繁軍;20世紀(jì)80年代以來(lái)的醫(yī)患糾紛:背景、現(xiàn)狀與對(duì)策[J];中國(guó)衛(wèi)生法制;2004年03期

8 陳秉U，

本文編號(hào)：1700695