比較侵權(quán)法與人格權(quán)法

1、清華大學(xué)法學(xué)院比較侵權(quán)法與人格權(quán)法（一）王澤鑒教授（2009.9.21）.課程目的、內(nèi)容及方法.侵權(quán)法與損害補(bǔ)償體系壹、課程目的、內(nèi)容及方法一、課程目的（一）侵權(quán)行為法（侵權(quán)法）及人格權(quán)法的重要性1.風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì)與侵權(quán)法風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì)、意外事故（accidents）, mass tort2.人格權(quán)的保護(hù)3.權(quán)益的侵害及損害 （1）人身（person），財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)（property），財(cái)富（wealth，純粹經(jīng)濟(jì)損失） （2）財(cái)產(chǎn)損害與精神損害（非財(cái)產(chǎn)損害）（二）中國大陸侵權(quán)行為法（侵權(quán)責(zé)任法）及人格權(quán)法的發(fā)展1.現(xiàn)行規(guī)范體系 債權(quán)（84-93） 權(quán)利體系 知識(shí)財(cái)產(chǎn)（94-99） 民法通則（1986） 人身權(quán)

2、（廣義）（98-107） 一般規(guī)定（106-110）民事責(zé)任 合同（111-116）（1）立法 侵權(quán)（117-133） 責(zé)任方式（134）環(huán)境保護(hù)法（1989） 特別法 反不正當(dāng)競爭法（1993） 產(chǎn)品質(zhì)量法（2000）等 名譽(yù)（1993） 司法解釋 最高人民法院解釋 精神損害賠償（2001）（2）司法 人身損害賠償（2003） 法院判決2.侵權(quán)責(zé)任法及人格權(quán)法的制定（1）侵權(quán)責(zé)任法的制定草案內(nèi)容比較法研究（2）人格權(quán)法的制定單獨(dú)立法與侵權(quán)法的關(guān)系3.學(xué)說理論（學(xué)者）的貢獻(xiàn)較多的學(xué)者，豐富的研究成果外國法介紹與比較法研究侵權(quán)法教科書的數(shù)量遠(yuǎn)超德國集體性研究的推動(dòng)：歐洲法研究的借鑒 4.立法與學(xué)

3、說的協(xié)力： 立法前：重要問題的專題研究：立法理由書的撰寫 立法后：注釋工作二、課程內(nèi)容（一）緒論1.侵權(quán)法與人身損害補(bǔ)償體系2.侵權(quán)法、民法與憲法（基本權(quán)利、侵權(quán)法的憲法化）（二）比較法3.比較法方法論的基本問題4.Civil law（大陸法）與Common law （普通法）；歐洲侵權(quán)法及美國侵權(quán)法（三）侵權(quán)法 5.一般侵權(quán)行為在比較法上的規(guī)范模式與侵權(quán)法草案規(guī)定：受保護(hù)利益與違法性理論 6.受保護(hù)的權(quán)益（protected interests）；二個(gè)比較法的研究課題：（1）Wrongful Birth and Wrongful Life （2）純粹經(jīng)濟(jì)損失（purely economic

4、loss） 7.侵權(quán)行為：作為、不作為；直接侵害與間接侵害；社會(huì)安全保護(hù)義務(wù)與德國法上的交易往來安全義務(wù)（Verkehrspflicht） 8.因果關(guān)系及多數(shù)人的侵權(quán)行為9.歸責(zé)原則10.特殊侵權(quán)行為的類型構(gòu)造11.未成年人及法定代理人的侵權(quán)行為（加害人）與未成年人作為被害人在侵權(quán)法上的保護(hù)（四）人格權(quán)法12.人格權(quán)的性質(zhì)及構(gòu)造 （1）意義、性質(zhì)及變遷 （2）一般人格權(quán)與特別人格權(quán) （3）自然人人格權(quán)與法人人格權(quán) （4）未出生者的保護(hù)與死者人格權(quán) （5）私法上的人格權(quán)與憲法上的人格權(quán)13.人格權(quán)上的精神利益及財(cái)產(chǎn)利益的保護(hù)14.人格權(quán)保護(hù)與言論自由15.侵權(quán)責(zé)任的方式，救濟(jì)機(jī)制16.比較法上的

5、發(fā)展與中國侵權(quán)責(zé)任法草案的基本問題三、研究方法（一）法釋義學(xué)（Rechtsdogmatik） 1.法釋義學(xué)的意義及功能 2.德國法學(xué)的思考方法 3.以違法性（Rechtswidrigkeit）及交易往來安全義務(wù)（Verkehrspflicht）為例（二）法律經(jīng)濟(jì)分析 1.法律經(jīng)濟(jì)分析：資源的有效率配置 2.侵權(quán)法的功能：損害的預(yù)防；侵權(quán)法的立法與解釋適用（三）判例研究1.侵權(quán)法是判例法（case law）（1）英美（2）法國（3）德國（4）大陸及臺(tái)灣 2.判例研究的強(qiáng)化 （1）判例公布制度 （2）判例研究方法 法釋學(xué)；法學(xué)方法論；比較法 判例研究會(huì)四、請(qǐng)求權(quán)基礎(chǔ)的思考方法（一）案例A向B購買C

6、制造的卡車，因A疏于注意該卡車輪胎具有缺陷，發(fā)生車禍，車半毀，A受傷，撞到路人D，D血流如注，D的（妻、未婚妻或路人）E目睹其事，精神崩潰住院。F救助D，遭車撞傷。該車禍阻塞道路，G等出租車不能外出營業(yè)，H駕車不耐久等，跨越I的庭院，毀損I的花草。（二）請(qǐng)求權(quán)的思考方式1.誰得向誰，依據(jù)何種法律規(guī)范，有所主張？（1）誰（原告）得向誰（被告） 物之交付等（2）有所主張 損害賠償 財(cái)產(chǎn)損害 精神損害（3）法律規(guī)范（請(qǐng)求權(quán)基礎(chǔ)） 意義及構(gòu)造探尋及檢查法律的解釋適用（三）案例解說人傷車毀合同侵權(quán)人傷車毀 B C 人身侵權(quán) 純粹經(jīng)濟(jì)損失侵權(quán)A D（第一被害人） E（Nervous shock） F（救助

7、者，Rescuer） G（純粹經(jīng)濟(jì)損失） I（因果關(guān)系）貳、侵權(quán)法與損害補(bǔ)償制度一、人身損害補(bǔ)償體系 （一）案例及問題 甲受雇于于乙，駕貨車撞到受雇于丙而騎自行車送貨之丁，丁受傷（殘廢、死亡），丁對(duì)損害的發(fā)生與有百分之六十的過失：（1） 對(duì)丁的損害應(yīng)如何補(bǔ)償？（2） 如何設(shè)計(jì)補(bǔ)充制度（二）分析框架 社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)產(chǎn)品 填補(bǔ)、預(yù)防 功能及原則 正義、效率 公共政策體系構(gòu)成 共同協(xié)力與變動(dòng)調(diào)整 私的利益 法規(guī)范 研究方法 經(jīng)濟(jì)分析 社會(huì)學(xué) 保險(xiǎn)實(shí)務(wù) 比較法 勞工損害 課題 車禍?zhǔn)鹿?醫(yī)療事故 環(huán)境破壞等（特殊侵權(quán)行為）勞動(dòng)損害汽車事故健康疾病等相互關(guān)系被害人加害人相互關(guān)系社會(huì)安全（無過失補(bǔ)償） 侵權(quán)法保

8、險(xiǎn)制度填補(bǔ)損害、預(yù)防損害過錯(cuò)全部賠償 財(cái)產(chǎn)損害 精神損害過失相抵 功能：填補(bǔ)損害第一人保險(xiǎn) 種類 任意 強(qiáng)制 關(guān)系：損益相抵 功能： 分散損害第三人責(zé)任險(xiǎn) 種類 任意 強(qiáng)制 對(duì)侵權(quán)法的影響 意義求償 功能 實(shí)施 費(fèi)用誰？ 何種損害？誰？ 何種損害？立法：無過錯(cuò)責(zé)任：產(chǎn)品責(zé)任 過失認(rèn)定法院 衡平責(zé)任、公平責(zé)任 賠償全額預(yù)防功能：如何維護(hù)？私法契約自由市場失敗市場公法（行政法）基本生活保障損害補(bǔ)償不以過錯(cuò)為要件最低生活 財(cái)產(chǎn)（） 精神（）不適用過失相抵（三）汽車事故侵權(quán)行為：推定過失無過錯(cuò)補(bǔ)償（add-on型） 1.規(guī)范機(jī)制 2.臺(tái)灣的強(qiáng)制汽車責(zé)任保險(xiǎn) 3.代位求償： （1）強(qiáng)制汽車責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)法第3

9、3條：汽車交通事故之發(fā)生，如可歸責(zé)于被保險(xiǎn)人以外之第三人，保險(xiǎn)人于保險(xiǎn)給付后，得代位行使被保險(xiǎn)人對(duì)于第三人之請(qǐng)求權(quán)。但其所得請(qǐng)求之?dāng)?shù)額，以不逾保險(xiǎn)給付為限。 前項(xiàng)第三人為被保險(xiǎn)人或請(qǐng)求權(quán)人之配偶、家長、家屬、四親等內(nèi)血親或三親等內(nèi)姻親者，保險(xiǎn)無代位求償之權(quán)利。但汽車交通事故由其故意所致者，不在此限。 （2）全民健康保險(xiǎn)法第82條：保險(xiǎn)對(duì)象因發(fā)生保險(xiǎn)事故，而對(duì)第三人有損害賠償請(qǐng)求權(quán)者，本保險(xiǎn)之保險(xiǎn)人于提供保險(xiǎn)給付后，得依下列規(guī)定，代位行使損害賠償清求權(quán)：a. 汽車交通事故：向強(qiáng)制汽車責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)保險(xiǎn)人請(qǐng)求；b.公共安全事故：向第三人依法規(guī)強(qiáng)制投保之責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)保險(xiǎn)人請(qǐng)求。c.其他重大之交通事故、公害或食

10、品中毒事件：第三人已投保責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)者，向保險(xiǎn)人請(qǐng)求；未投保者，向第三人請(qǐng)求。前項(xiàng)第三款所定重大交通事故、公害及食品中毒事件之求償范圍、方式及程序等事項(xiàng)之辦法，由主管機(jī)關(guān)定之。 二、侵權(quán)法的功能（目的）1 填補(bǔ)損害：事后賠償（ex poet）Homles與Mataja氏的名言 Homles: “ Sound policy lets losser lie where they fall except where a special reason can be shown for interference. ” (The Common Law, 1881, P.50) Mataja: “No act

11、of legislature in the world can eliminate an injury once it has occurred. The law is powerless against a completed act. The legislation can only realistically pursue two goals with respect to the risk of injuries. It can 1) initiate preventive measures; and 2) assign the burden of an injury which ha

12、s occurred to the person best suited to assume it, according to the demands of justice and economic efficiency.” (Das Recht des schadensersatzes vom standpunkt der Nationalökonomie, 1881, 19). 損害移轉(zhuǎn)與損害分配損害賠償與正義（平均正義，分配正義）預(yù)防制裁：事先防范（ex ante） 預(yù)防、制裁、懲罰 預(yù)防、制裁、懲罰 刑法與行政法規(guī) 中國侵權(quán)法草案應(yīng)否明定“預(yù)防制裁”為侵權(quán)法的目的？ 比較法特

13、色 主要目的、次要目的過錯(cuò)責(zé)任、無過錯(cuò)責(zé)任與有過失引進(jìn)懲罰性賠償（punitive damage） 如何實(shí)踐 立法設(shè)計(jì)過失認(rèn)定慰撫金量定：斟酌加害人的獲利解釋適用經(jīng)濟(jì)分析侵權(quán)法的經(jīng)濟(jì)分析侵權(quán)法的設(shè)計(jì)及適用 最適的注意義務(wù)最適的活動(dòng)水平被害人的與有過失過失責(zé)任與無過失責(zé)任Cheapest cost avoider, cheapest insurer 經(jīng)濟(jì)分析方法在適用上的限制 二保險(xiǎn)制度：市場機(jī)制私法 緒說 第一人保險(xiǎn) 意義及功能 種類誰？何種侵害？ 任意 強(qiáng)制與侵權(quán)法的關(guān)系：損益相抵第三人責(zé)任險(xiǎn) 意義及功能 對(duì)被保險(xiǎn)人（加害人） 對(duì)被害人 種類 任意 強(qiáng)制 與侵權(quán)法的關(guān)系：分散損害 責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)與

14、無過錯(cuò)商品責(zé)任“The cost of an injury and the loss of time or health may be an overwhelming misfortune to the person injured, and a needless one, for the risk of injury can be insured by the manufacturer and distributed among the public as a cost of doing business” Escola v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Fresno

15、, 150 P.2d 436, 440f. 損害分配：Wer versichert ist, haftet (誰有保險(xiǎn)，就應(yīng)負(fù)責(zé))：侵權(quán)法的解釋適用美國七十年代責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)危機(jī)（Liability Insurance Crisis）與侵權(quán)行為法的發(fā)展 Prieit, The Current Insurance Crisis and Modern Tort Law, 96 Yale L.J. 1521(1987) 澳洲保險(xiǎn)危機(jī)與侵權(quán)行為改革（Tort Reform,2002-2003）: Mendelson, The New Law of torts, Oxford,2007) 三社會(huì)安全（Soci

16、al Security）: 公法規(guī)范（行政法）意義及功能：社會(huì)安全與無過錯(cuò)補(bǔ)償（No-fault Compensation）：“No-fault means different to different people.”社會(huì)安全（社會(huì)法）與侵權(quán)責(zé)任（侵權(quán)法）的區(qū)別 過錯(cuò)的要件 因果關(guān)系的認(rèn)定 賠償?shù)姆N類及范圍 與有過失原則的適用社會(huì)法與侵權(quán)法的關(guān)系 相互影響：美國侵權(quán)法的發(fā)展（健康保險(xiǎn)制度的改革） 求償問題：社會(huì)安全體系向加害人及責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人的求償制度社會(huì)安全制度的完善及界限四人身損害補(bǔ)償體系的建構(gòu) 多種的補(bǔ)償機(jī)制社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的產(chǎn)物 協(xié)力、調(diào)整 建構(gòu)原則：公平及效率成本費(fèi)用 過度補(bǔ)償（exces

17、s compensation）的避免 侵權(quán)法與責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)及社會(huì)安全 侵權(quán)行為不是最重要的補(bǔ)償機(jī)制 以保險(xiǎn)取代侵權(quán)法？ 個(gè)人的自由及責(zé)任 車禍?zhǔn)鹿实难a(bǔ)償?shù)种七^錯(cuò)責(zé)任推定過失無過錯(cuò)責(zé)任 侵權(quán)行為第一人保險(xiǎn)責(zé)任保險(xiǎn) 車禍 保險(xiǎn)保留侵權(quán)行為取代侵權(quán)行為 無過錯(cuò)補(bǔ)償（社會(huì)安全）：不同的類型五研究課題 值得重視，有價(jià)值的研究項(xiàng)目 比較法上的研究綱要 歐洲侵權(quán)行為及保險(xiǎn)法研究中心（European Centre of Tort and Insurance Law, ECTIL）的研究計(jì)劃：Lilrich Magnus (ed.): The Impact of Social Security Law on To

18、rt Law (2003, New York) 一個(gè)創(chuàng)新的比較法研究方法（見下文附錄）附錄：Questionnaire Project of European Centre of Tort and Insurance Law, Vienna, on the Impact of Social Security Law on Private Tort Law Concerning Personal Injuries.Part 1: Questions General Questions 1.For the purposes of this questionnaire “social securit

19、y law” and “social security systems/agencies” are regulations and bodies which are state dominated and are designed to protect against the consequences of any bodily injuries including illnesses. Please make clear whether this definition fits with the understanding of social security law and social

20、security systems/agencies in your country.2. Is there, and can you define, a general dividing line between tort law and social security law as far as personal injuries are concerned? If so, which are the characteristics of that line?3. Are there significant differences in function between tort law a

21、nd social security law in the field of personal injuries? Which ones?Social Security Protection for Personal Injuries 1.To which percentage is the population in your country protected by social security systems against consequences of personal injuries? How far does private insurance step in?2.Which

22、 groups of the populations (e.g. employees etc.), are protected, which are not? Which are the reasons for any differentiation?3.How far does the social security protection cover injuries caused by others?4.Who finances the social security protection? Relationship between Tort Law and Social Security

23、 Law1. Does social security law completely replace tort liability? If so, in which fields and under which conditions? Which are the reasons for any such replacement?2.In case social security replaces tort law, are there exceptions where tort law still remains applicable? If so, under which condition

24、s and for which reasons?3.Are there significant difference between tort law and social security law as far as core elements of compensation/protection are concerned, in particular as to·fault ·causation·pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage·contributory negligence 4.Are there differ

25、ences in the amount of compensation normally granted by tort law or by social security law? If so, which problems result from any such differences and how are they resolved?5.Does the social security agency which grants protection to the injured person have the right of recourse against the person w

26、ho caused the injury? If so, under which conditions? Even in case where tort liability of the wrongdoer is replaced (see .1)6.How is any recourse action dealt with when either the injured person, a member of the victims family or a co-employee has contributed to the damage?7.Do agreements between so

27、cial security and social or private insurers exist which regulate the distribution of damages between them? Do those agreements render recourse actions superfluous? Do those agreements influence tort law? If so, in which respect? 8.Which further problems are created by the interplay between tort law

28、 and social security law in your country?9.Can certain impacts (which?) either of social security law on tort law or vice versa be identified?10.Give figures (if available in your country) which show the economic dimension of tort law compensation on the one side and social security protection on th

29、e other. Figures as to the extent of recourse actions?11.Are figures available on the transaction costs which the compensation under tort law consumes as compared to those costs under social security schemes?(Transaction costs=costs for the process of compensation).12.Are there considerations(which?

30、) for reform in your county which influence the relationship between tort law and social security law?Part 2: Case1.a)A, employed by employer X, is injured by employee B, employed by employee Y,while working on a building site. B acted with slight negligence. From whom can A claim his costs for medi

31、cal treatment and compensation for pain and suffering (non-pecuniary damage)?From the social security agency where employees like A (and also B) are normally insured? From B (or his employer Y)?If the social security agency bears costs would it have a recourse action against B (or his employer Y)?b)

32、Are the results the same when B acted with intent or gross negligence?c)Is there a difference when A and B are employed by the same employer?2. Employee A has been severely injured by cyclist B and is therefore ill for three weeks, so that he cannot work. Can A claim continued payment of wages from his employer C? In full or in part?If in part, can A sue B for the rest?If C is obliged to pay As wages, does C have a recourse action against B?3.Employee A IS injured through the carelessness of his employer B. Can A claim compensation for his damage from B? Or from the social security