侵權(quán)法中機會損失問題研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-07-16 14:38
【摘要】：機會損失理論是指如果被告的侵權(quán)行為破壞或減少了原告獲得更有利結(jié)果的機會,原告可以就損失的機會請求賠償?shù)膶W(xué)說。該理論在域外法司法實踐中多有運用,但在適用范圍上存在差異。目前,我國法律并不承認機會損失屬于可賠償性損害,導(dǎo)致司法實踐中法官難以認定機會的損害賠償。理論界對機會損失的討論較少,對該理論的引入也存在爭議。為了正確指導(dǎo)司法實踐,更好地保護當(dāng)事人的權(quán)益,有必要對現(xiàn)行的規(guī)定進行完善。本文立足于侵權(quán)損害賠償?shù)幕驹?結(jié)合現(xiàn)行法律規(guī)定以及相關(guān)學(xué)者的理論研究,同時借鑒國外有關(guān)機會損失理論的具體案例和研究成果,提出機會損失理論引入我國的必要性和可行性,以期為我國司法實踐提供有益的借鑒。 本文共分為五個部分： 第一部分闡述了機會損失的概念、性質(zhì)、特征及類型。從概念上看,本文所討論的機會損失并不限于生存機會損失,還包括獲獎機會損失、商業(yè)機會損失等。從性質(zhì)上看,機會本身代表某種利益,具有法律保護價值。機會損失屬于期待利益,在醫(yī)療侵權(quán)領(lǐng)域還表現(xiàn)為人格利益。 第二部分是對機會損失理論比較法上的考察。主要闡述了美國法上機會損失理論的產(chǎn)生以及法國法、日本法對機會損失理論的拓展。分析比較不同國家有關(guān)機會損失理論適用范圍的差異。總結(jié)出各個國家及地區(qū)所采取的主要做法是認可寬松的因果關(guān)系標(biāo)準(zhǔn)以及有限度的承認機會損失作為一種損害。最后分析不同國家和地區(qū)司法實踐對我國的參考價值。 第三部分主要探討機會損失中的因果關(guān)系理論。比較分析了傳統(tǒng)因果關(guān)系規(guī)則在機會損失案件的不足與缺陷,因果關(guān)系標(biāo)準(zhǔn)并非一成不變,需要具體問題具體分析。并指出寬松因果關(guān)系應(yīng)廣泛適用于解決機會損失案件。 第四部分闡述機會損失中的損害賠償理論。主要圍繞機會損害的認定與損害賠償?shù)挠嬎銉煞矫孢M行。闡述了損害的特征、分類。主張從廣義上理解損害的概念,并認為機會損害具備可賠償性損害的一般特征。在損害賠償?shù)挠嬎惴绞缴?主張以比例賠償為主,法官自由裁量為輔的方法。 第五部分闡述我國立法與司法現(xiàn)狀及完善建議。我國現(xiàn)行法律規(guī)定并未涉及機會損失賠償。從司法實踐看,由于缺乏相關(guān)法律規(guī)定,受害人的機會損失往往難以得到賠償。但從國外立法、司法經(jīng)驗與我國國情看,我國承認機會損失賠償具有必要性和可行性。建議我國引入機會損失理論,以侵權(quán)法第2條、第6條作為其請求權(quán)基礎(chǔ)。在機會損失賠償計算方面,以最終損害乘以相應(yīng)的系數(shù),計算賠償數(shù)額。
[Abstract]:The theory of opportunity loss refers to the doctrine that the plaintiff can claim compensation for the opportunity of loss if the defendant's tort destroys or reduces the plaintiff's chances of obtaining more favorable results. The theory is widely used in the judicial practice of extraterritorial law, but there are differences in the scope of application. At present, the law of our country does not recognize the opportunity loss as compensable damage, which makes it difficult for the judge to determine the opportunity damage compensation in judicial practice. The theory of opportunity loss is less discussed, and the introduction of the theory is also controversial. In order to guide judicial practice correctly and better protect the rights and interests of the parties, it is necessary to perfect the existing regulations. This paper is based on the basic principle of tort compensation, combined with the current laws and regulations and the theoretical research of relevant scholars, and at the same time draw lessons from the specific cases and research results of the opportunity loss theory in foreign countries. The necessity and feasibility of introducing opportunity loss theory into our country are put forward in order to provide useful reference for our judicial practice. This paper is divided into five parts: the first part describes the concept, nature, characteristics and types of opportunity loss. Conceptually, the opportunity loss discussed in this paper is not limited to the loss of chance of survival, but also includes loss of chance of winning and loss of opportunity of business. In nature, opportunity itself represents a certain interest and has legal protection value. The opportunity loss belongs to the expectation benefit, also manifests as the personality benefit in the medical tort domain. The second part is a comparative study of opportunity loss theory. This paper mainly expounds the emergence of opportunity loss theory in American law and the expansion of opportunity loss theory by French law and Japanese law. This paper analyzes and compares the differences in the scope of application of the opportunity loss theory in different countries. It is concluded that the main measures adopted by various countries and regions are to recognize the loose causality standard and the limited recognition of opportunity loss as a kind of damage. Finally, it analyzes the reference value of judicial practice in different countries and regions. The third part mainly discusses the causality theory in opportunity loss. This paper compares and analyzes the shortcomings and defects of the traditional causality rules in the case of opportunity loss. The criterion of causation is not fixed and needs to be analyzed concretely. It also points out that the loose causality should be widely applied to solve the case of opportunity loss. The fourth part elaborates the damage compensation theory in the opportunity loss. Mainly around the opportunity damage confirmation and the damage compensation computation two aspects carries on. The characteristics and classification of damage are expounded. The author holds that the concept of damage should be understood in a broad sense, and that opportunity damage has the general characteristics of compensable damage. In the way of calculating damages, we advocate the method of proportional compensation, supplemented by judges' discretion. The fifth part elaborates our country legislation and the judicature present situation and the consummation proposal. China's current laws and regulations do not involve opportunity loss compensation. From the judicial practice, due to the lack of relevant legal provisions, the victim's loss of opportunity is often difficult to obtain compensation. However, from the point of view of foreign legislation, judicial experience and China's national conditions, it is necessary and feasible for our country to admit that compensation for loss of opportunity is necessary and feasible. It is suggested that our country introduce the theory of opportunity loss and take Article 2 and Article 6 of the Tort Law as the basis of its claim. In the calculation of opportunity loss compensation, the amount of compensation is calculated by multiplying the corresponding coefficient with the final damage.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江工商大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D913
本文編號：2126695
[Abstract]:The theory of opportunity loss refers to the doctrine that the plaintiff can claim compensation for the opportunity of loss if the defendant's tort destroys or reduces the plaintiff's chances of obtaining more favorable results. The theory is widely used in the judicial practice of extraterritorial law, but there are differences in the scope of application. At present, the law of our country does not recognize the opportunity loss as compensable damage, which makes it difficult for the judge to determine the opportunity damage compensation in judicial practice. The theory of opportunity loss is less discussed, and the introduction of the theory is also controversial. In order to guide judicial practice correctly and better protect the rights and interests of the parties, it is necessary to perfect the existing regulations. This paper is based on the basic principle of tort compensation, combined with the current laws and regulations and the theoretical research of relevant scholars, and at the same time draw lessons from the specific cases and research results of the opportunity loss theory in foreign countries. The necessity and feasibility of introducing opportunity loss theory into our country are put forward in order to provide useful reference for our judicial practice. This paper is divided into five parts: the first part describes the concept, nature, characteristics and types of opportunity loss. Conceptually, the opportunity loss discussed in this paper is not limited to the loss of chance of survival, but also includes loss of chance of winning and loss of opportunity of business. In nature, opportunity itself represents a certain interest and has legal protection value. The opportunity loss belongs to the expectation benefit, also manifests as the personality benefit in the medical tort domain. The second part is a comparative study of opportunity loss theory. This paper mainly expounds the emergence of opportunity loss theory in American law and the expansion of opportunity loss theory by French law and Japanese law. This paper analyzes and compares the differences in the scope of application of the opportunity loss theory in different countries. It is concluded that the main measures adopted by various countries and regions are to recognize the loose causality standard and the limited recognition of opportunity loss as a kind of damage. Finally, it analyzes the reference value of judicial practice in different countries and regions. The third part mainly discusses the causality theory in opportunity loss. This paper compares and analyzes the shortcomings and defects of the traditional causality rules in the case of opportunity loss. The criterion of causation is not fixed and needs to be analyzed concretely. It also points out that the loose causality should be widely applied to solve the case of opportunity loss. The fourth part elaborates the damage compensation theory in the opportunity loss. Mainly around the opportunity damage confirmation and the damage compensation computation two aspects carries on. The characteristics and classification of damage are expounded. The author holds that the concept of damage should be understood in a broad sense, and that opportunity damage has the general characteristics of compensable damage. In the way of calculating damages, we advocate the method of proportional compensation, supplemented by judges' discretion. The fifth part elaborates our country legislation and the judicature present situation and the consummation proposal. China's current laws and regulations do not involve opportunity loss compensation. From the judicial practice, due to the lack of relevant legal provisions, the victim's loss of opportunity is often difficult to obtain compensation. However, from the point of view of foreign legislation, judicial experience and China's national conditions, it is necessary and feasible for our country to admit that compensation for loss of opportunity is necessary and feasible. It is suggested that our country introduce the theory of opportunity loss and take Article 2 and Article 6 of the Tort Law as the basis of its claim. In the calculation of opportunity loss compensation, the amount of compensation is calculated by multiplying the corresponding coefficient with the final damage.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江工商大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D913
【參考文獻】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 王全弟;陳愛碧;;侵權(quán)法中的機會喪失理論[J];復(fù)旦學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2007年03期
2 高建民;袁雪石;;侵權(quán)責(zé)任法的制定及民法其他問題 中國法學(xué)會民法學(xué)研究會2006年年會綜述[J];法律適用;2006年10期
3 田韶華,樊鴻雁;論機會喪失的損害賠償[J];法商研究;2005年04期
4 彭書雅;夏文濤;;機會喪失醫(yī)療糾紛因果關(guān)系及參與程度鑒定分析[J];證據(jù)科學(xué);2013年03期
5 王賀洋;;論機會利益侵權(quán)損害賠償[J];長江大學(xué)學(xué)報(社科版);2013年07期
6 葉名怡;;醫(yī)療侵權(quán)責(zé)任中因果關(guān)系的認定[J];中外法學(xué);2012年01期
7 葉金強;;論侵權(quán)損害賠償范圍的確定[J];中外法學(xué);2012年01期
8 覃有土,晏宇橋;論侵權(quán)的間接損失認定[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2004年04期
9 呂來明;;論商業(yè)機會的法律保護[J];中國法學(xué);2006年05期
10 張妮莉;趙靜;;基于2009-2013年相關(guān)文獻的醫(yī)療糾紛案例統(tǒng)計分析[J];醫(yī)學(xué)與社會;2014年06期
相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條
1 林位強;醫(yī)療事故的認定與損害賠償研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2008年
，本文編號：2126695
本文鏈接：http://www.sikaile.net/falvlunwen/minfalunwen/2126695.html
最近更新
教材專著
