王泽鉴-清华-第一讲比较侵权法与人格权法

清华大学法学院比较侵权法与人格权法（一）王泽鉴教授（2009.9.21）Ⅰ.课程目的、内容及方法Ⅱ.侵权法与损害补偿体系壹、课程目的、内容及方法一、课程目的（一）侵权行为法（侵权法）及人格权法的重要性1.风险社会与侵权法风险社会、意外事故（accidents）, mass tort2.人格权的保护3.权益的侵害及损害（1）人身（person），财产权（property），财富（wealth，纯粹经济损失）（2）财产损害与精神损害（非财产损害）（二）中国大陆侵权行为法（侵权责任法）及人格权法的发展1.现行规范体系债权（84-93）权利体系知识财产（94-99）民法通则（1986）人身权（广义）（98-107）一般规定（106-110）民事责任合同（111-116）（1）立法侵权（117-133）责任方式（134）环境保护法（1989）特别法反不正当竞争法（1993）产品质量法（2000）等名誉（1993）司法解释最高人民法院解释精神损害赔偿（2001）（2）司法人身损害赔偿（2003）法院判决2.侵权责任法及人格权法的制定（1）侵权责任法的制定①草案内容②比较法研究（2）人格权法的制定①单独立法②与侵权法的关系3.学说理论（学者）的贡献①较多的学者，丰富的研究成果②外国法介绍与比较法研究③侵权法教科书的数量远超德国④集体性研究的推动：欧洲法研究的借鉴4.立法与学说的协力：①立法前：重要问题的专题研究：立法理由书的撰写②立法后：注释工作二、课程内容（一）绪论1.侵权法与人身损害补偿体系2.侵权法、民法与宪法（基本权利、侵权法的宪法化）（二）比较法3.比较法方法论的基本问题4.Civil law（大陆法）与Common law （普通法）；欧洲侵权法及美国侵权法（三）侵权法5.一般侵权行为在比较法上的规范模式与侵权法草案规定：受保护利益与违法性理论6.受保护的权益（protected interests）；二个比较法的研究课题：（1）Wrongful Birth and Wrongful Life（2）纯粹经济损失（purely economic loss）7.侵权行为：作为、不作为；直接侵害与间接侵害；社会安全保护义务与德国法上的交易往来安全义务（Verkehrspflicht）8.因果关系及多数人的侵权行为9.归责原则10.特殊侵权行为的类型构造11.未成年人及法定代理人的侵权行为（加害人）与未成年人作为被害人在侵权法上的保护（四）人格权法12.人格权的性质及构造（1）意义、性质及变迁（2）一般人格权与特别人格权（3）自然人人格权与法人人格权（4）未出生者的保护与死者人格权（5）私法上的人格权与宪法上的人格权13.人格权上的精神利益及财产利益的保护14.人格权保护与言论自由15.侵权责任的方式，救济机制16.比较法上的发展与中国侵权责任法草案的基本问题三、研究方法（一）法释义学（Rechtsdogmatik）1.法释义学的意义及功能2.德国法学的思考方法3.以违法性（Rechtswidrigkeit）及交易往来安全义务（Verkehrspflicht）为例（二）法律经济分析1.法律经济分析：资源的有效率配置2.侵权法的功能：损害的预防；侵权法的立法与解释适用（三）判例研究1.侵权法是判例法（case law）（1）英美（2）法国（3）德国（4）大陆及台湾2.判例研究的强化（1）判例公布制度（2）判例研究方法①法释学；法学方法论；比较法②判例研究会四、请求权基础的思考方法（一）案例A向B购买C制造的卡车，因A疏于注意该卡车轮胎具有缺陷，发生车祸，车半毁，A受伤，撞到路人D，D血流如注，D的（妻、未婚妻或路人）E目睹其事，精神崩溃住院。

F救助D，遭车撞伤。

该车祸阻塞道路，G等出租车不能外出营业，H驾车不耐久等，跨越I的庭院，毁损I的花草。

（二）请求权的思考方式1.谁得向谁，依据何种法律规范，有所主张？（1）谁（原告）得向谁（被告）物之交付等（2）有所主张损害赔偿财产损害精神损害（3）法律规范（请求权基础）①意义及构造②探寻及检查③法律的解释适用（三）案例解说C 人身——侵权纯粹经济损失——侵权（第一被害人）（Nervous shock）（救助者，Rescuer）（纯粹经济损失）（因果关系）贰、侵权法与损害补偿制度一、人身损害补偿体系（一）案例及问题甲受雇于于乙，驾货车撞到受雇于丙而骑自行车送货之丁，丁受伤（残废、死亡），丁对损害的发生与有百分之六十的过失：（1）对丁的损害应如何补偿？（2）如何设计补充制度（二）分析框架（三）汽车事故1.规范机制2.台湾的强制汽车责任保险3.代位求偿：（1）强制汽车责任保险法第33条：Ⅰ汽车交通事故之发生，如可归责于被保险人以外之第三人，保险人于保险给付后，得代位行使被保险人对于第三人之请求权。

但其所得请求之数额，以不逾保险给付为限。

Ⅱ前项第三人为被保险人或请求权人之配偶、家长、家属、四亲等内血亲或三亲等内姻亲者，保险无代位求偿之权利。

但汽车交通事故由其故意所致者，不在此限。

（2）全民健康保险法第82条：Ⅰ保险对象因发生保险事故，而对第三人有损害赔偿请求权者，本保险之保险人于提供保险给付后，得依下列规定，代位行使损害赔偿清求权：a. 汽车交通事故：向强制汽车责任保险保险人请求；b.公共安全事故：向第三人依法规强制投保之责任保险保险人请求。

c.其他重大之交通事故、公害或食品中毒事件：第三人已投保责任保险者，向保险人请求；未投保者，向第三人请求。

Ⅱ前项第三款所定重大交通事故、公害及食品中毒事件之求偿范围、方式及程序等事项之办法，由主管机关定之。

二、侵权法的功能（目的）㈠填补损害：事后赔偿（ex poet）⒈Homles与Mataja氏的名言⑴Homles: “Sound policy lets losser lie where they fall except where a special reason can be shown for interference. ” (The Common Law, 1881, P.50) ⑵Mataja: “No act 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 has occurred to the person best suited to assume it, according to the demands ofjustice and economic efficiency.”(Das Recht des schadensersatzes vomstandpunkt der Nationalökonomie, 1881, 19).⒉损害移转与损害分配⒊损害赔偿与正义（平均正义，分配正义）㈡预防制裁：事先防范（ex ante）⒈预防、制裁、惩罚⑴预防、制裁、惩罚⑵刑法与行政法规⒉中国侵权法草案应否明定“预防制裁”为侵权法的目的？⑴比较法特色⑵主要目的、次要目的⑶如何实践②解释适用㈢经济分析⒈侵权法的经济分析⒉侵权法的设计及适用⑴最适的注意义务⑵最适的活动水平⑶被害人的与有过失⑷过失责任与无过失责任⑸Cheapest cost avoider, cheapest insurer⒊经济分析方法在适用上的限制二．保险制度：市场机制——私法㈠绪说㈡第一人保险⒈意义及功能⒉种类⑴任意⑵强制㈢第三人责任险⒈意义及功能⑴对被保险人（加害人）⑵对被害人⒉种类⑴任意⑵强制⒊与侵权法的关系：分散损害⑴责任保险与无过错商品责任“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”①⑵损害分配：Wer versichert ist, haftet (谁有保险，就应负责)：侵权法的解释适用⒋美国七十年代责任保险危机（Liability Insurance Crisis）与侵权行为法的发展②⒌澳洲保险危机与侵权行为改革（Tort Reform,2002-2003）: Mendelson,The New Law of torts, Oxford,2007)三．社会安全（Social Security）: 公法规范（行政法）㈠意义及功能：社会安全与无过错补偿（No-fault Compensation）：“No-fault means different to different people.”㈡社会安全（社会法）与侵权责任（侵权法）的区别⒈过错的要件①Escola v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Fresno, 150 P.2d 436, 440f.②Prieit, The Current Insurance Crisis and Modern Tort Law, 96 Yale L.J. 1521(1987)⒉因果关系的认定 ⒊赔偿的种类及范围 ⒋与有过失原则的适用 ㈢社会法与侵权法的关系⒈相互影响：美国侵权法的发展（健康保险制度的改革） ⒉求偿问题：社会安全体系向加害人及责任保险人的求偿制度 ㈣社会安全制度的完善及界限四．人身损害补偿体系的建构 ㈠多种的补偿机制 ⒈社会经济发展的产物 ⒉协力、调整㈡建构原则：公平及效率 ⒈成本费用⒉过度补偿（excess compensation ）的避免 ㈢侵权法与责任保险及社会安全 ⒈侵权行为不是最重要的补偿机制 ⒉以保险取代侵权法？ ⒊个人的自由及责任 ㈣车祸事故的补偿抵制车祸 保险无过错补偿（社会安全）：不同的类型五．研究课题㈠值得重视，有价值的研究项目㈡比较法上的研究纲要⒈欧洲侵权行为及保险法研究中心（European Centre of Tort and InsuranceLaw, ECTIL）的研究计划：Lilrich Magnus (ed.): The Impact of Social Security Law on Tort Law (2003, New York)⒉一个创新的比较法研究方法（见下文附录）附录：QuestionnaireProject 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: QuestionsⅠGeneral Questions1.For the purposes of this questionnaire “social security 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 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 and social security law in the field of personal injuries? Which ones?ⅡSocial Security Protection for Personal Injuries1.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 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?Ⅲ Relationship between Tort Law and Social Security 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 conditions and for which reasons?3.Are there significant difference between tort law and social security law as faras core elements of compensation/protection are concerned, in particular as to ·fault·causation·pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage·contributory negligence4.Are there differences 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 who caused the injury? If so, under which conditions? Even in case where tort liability of the wrongdoer is replaced (see Ⅲ.1)6.How is any recourse action dealt with when either the injured person, a member of the victim’s family or a co-employee has contributed to the damage?7.Do agreements between social 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 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 the 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?) 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 medical 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)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 A’s 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 agency only? If the latter is the case, does the agency have a recourse action against employer B?4.Employee A has been negligently injured through co-employee B (employer C,a third person), but A himself has also negligently contributed to his damage. To which extent, if any, does A’s contributory negligence influence his compensation either from the social security agency or from the tortfeasor? Does A’s contributory negligence influence any recourse claim that the social security agency may have against the tortfeasor?5. Please add further cases if necessary.。