發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-03-28 04:02

  本文選題：食品安全法　切入點(diǎn)：懲罰性賠償　出處：《上海師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：食品安全牽涉千家萬(wàn)戶,每一次食品類的法律出臺(tái)都受到整個(gè)社會(huì)的高度關(guān)注,自2009年《中華人民共和國(guó)食品安全法》出臺(tái),到2015年修訂《食品安全法》,懲罰性賠償制度就一直受到熱議。懲罰性賠償制度,本身就是一個(gè)充滿爭(zhēng)議的制度,它起源于英美法系,但是英美法系對(duì)這個(gè)制度也是有著較大的爭(zhēng)議,大陸法系的國(guó)家基本還沒(méi)有接受該制度,只是在一定程度上不再像以前那么反對(duì)懲罰性賠償制度。我國(guó)在《食品安全法》中引入該制度,在全國(guó)范圍內(nèi),不管是專家學(xué)者,又或者是普通公民,對(duì)此基本沒(méi)有什么反對(duì)的聲音。但是,在具體的實(shí)踐過(guò)程中,由于我國(guó)并沒(méi)有很堅(jiān)實(shí)的法律理論作為支撐,導(dǎo)致該制度在現(xiàn)實(shí)適用中遇到了很多問(wèn)題,例如賠償金的確定,該制度調(diào)整的主體范圍等都出現(xiàn)了爭(zhēng)議,為此在現(xiàn)實(shí)中也出現(xiàn)了同案不同判的情況。本文結(jié)構(gòu)一共分為五個(gè)部分,第一章是該制度適用的背景,國(guó)內(nèi)外的一些研究現(xiàn)狀等,以加強(qiáng)對(duì)該制度的發(fā)展及現(xiàn)狀的了解。第二章介紹了該制度的一些基本概念以及該制度的自身價(jià)值的體現(xiàn)。第三章具體介紹了該制度在我國(guó)《食品安全法》中的適用。在實(shí)踐中,關(guān)于懲罰性賠償金的合理確定,制度調(diào)整的主體,精神損害賠償金的缺失等方面,都存在不同程度的問(wèn)題。第四章介紹了美國(guó)以及我國(guó)臺(tái)灣地區(qū)的食品安全懲罰性賠償制度,并加以分析。之所以選擇美國(guó)和臺(tái)灣地區(qū)的該制度,是由于該制度起源于英美法系,美國(guó)是世界上該制度發(fā)展的最成熟的國(guó)家,而臺(tái)灣是對(duì)于該制度本土化做的較好的地區(qū)。第五章則是針對(duì)該制度在我國(guó)存在的問(wèn)題,提出將銷售者的重大過(guò)失行為納入調(diào)整,確定彈性賠償金,從賠償金中征收一定比例以建立相關(guān)基金,引入公益訴訟,以及增加精神損害賠償金等建議。
[Abstract]:Food safety involves thousands of households. Every time the food law is issued, the whole society pays close attention to it. Since 2009, the Food Safety Law of the people's Republic of China has been issued. By the time the Food Safety Act was amended in 2015, the punitive damages system has been the subject of heated discussion. The punitive damages system itself is a controversial system that originated in the Anglo-American legal system. However, the Anglo-American legal system is also controversial. Countries in the civil law system have basically not accepted the system. But to a certain extent, we are no longer as opposed to the punitive damages system as we used to be. Our country introduced this system in the Food Safety Law. Throughout the country, whether it is experts or scholars, or ordinary citizens, However, in the concrete practice process, because our country does not have the very solid legal theory as the support, causes this system to meet many problems in the practical application, for example, the determination of the compensation. The scope of the adjustment of the system has been controversial, and different judgments of the same case have also appeared in reality. The structure of this paper is divided into five parts. The first chapter is the background of the application of the system, and some domestic and foreign research status, etc. In order to strengthen the understanding of the development and present situation of the system, the second chapter introduces some basic concepts of the system and the embodiment of its own value. The third chapter introduces the system in the Food Safety Law of our country. Applicable... in practice, There are some problems about the reasonable determination of punitive damages, the subject of system adjustment, the lack of compensation for spiritual damages, etc. The fourth chapter introduces the food safety punitive damages system in the United States and Taiwan. The reason for choosing the system in the United States and Taiwan is that the system originated from the common law system, and the United States is the most mature country in the world for the development of this system. However, Taiwan is a good place for the localization of the system. The fifth chapter is aimed at the problems existing in the system in China, and proposes to bring the gross negligence of the sellers into the adjustment and determine the flexible compensation. Some suggestions such as setting up related funds, introducing public interest litigation, and increasing compensation for mental damages are proposed by levying a certain proportion of compensation.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D922.16

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 熊培芳;;中國(guó)食品安全問(wèn)題現(xiàn)狀成因及對(duì)策研究[J];農(nóng)業(yè)與技術(shù);2016年07期

2 瞿靈敏;;精神損害賠償懲罰性與懲罰性賠償補(bǔ)償性之批判——兼論精神損害賠償與懲罰性賠償?shù)牧⒎ㄍ晟芠J];東方法學(xué);2016年02期

3 稅兵;;懲罰性賠償?shù)囊?guī)范構(gòu)造——以最高人民法院第23號(hào)指導(dǎo)性案例為中心[J];法學(xué);2015年04期

4 孫效敏;張炳;;懲罰性賠償制度質(zhì)疑——兼評(píng)《侵權(quán)責(zé)任法》第47條[J];法學(xué)論壇;2015年02期

5 楊立新;;我國(guó)消費(fèi)者保護(hù)懲罰性賠償?shù)男掳l(fā)展[J];法學(xué)家;2014年02期

6 馬新彥;鄧冰寧;;論懲罰性賠償?shù)膿p害填補(bǔ)功能——以美國(guó)侵權(quán)法懲罰性賠償制度為啟示的研究[J];吉林大學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2012年03期

7 安東;;論法律的安全價(jià)值[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2012年03期

8 丁聲俊;;德國(guó)食品安全保障和食品風(fēng)險(xiǎn)防范措施[J];中國(guó)食物與營(yíng)養(yǎng);2011年05期

9 孔東菊;;論懲罰性賠償在我國(guó)立法中的確立和完善——從《消費(fèi)者權(quán)益保護(hù)法》到《侵權(quán)責(zé)任法》[J];法學(xué)雜志;2010年08期

10 周江洪;;懲罰性賠償責(zé)任的競(jìng)合及其適用——《侵權(quán)責(zé)任法》第47條與《食品安全法》第96條第2款之適用關(guān)系[J];法學(xué);2010年04期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 梁慧星;;消費(fèi)者權(quán)益保護(hù)法第49條的解釋與適用[N];人民法院報(bào);2001年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 張諾諾;懲罰性賠償制度研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：1674641