论兼采扶养丧失说与继承丧失说之可行性——对死亡赔偿中消极损害内容的再澄清  

On the Possibility of Applying Both Loss of Support Theory and Loss of Inheritance Theory:Further Clarifying the Contents concerning Indirect Damage in Compensation for Death

作　　者：谢慧阳[1] 

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学,重庆401120

出　　处：《西南政法大学学报》2013年第6期66-73,共8页Journal of Southwest University of Political Science and Law

基　　金：西南政法大学2012年度研究生科研创新计划一般项目"损害无法填补情况下的民法应对"(2012XZYJS127)

摘　　要：对于死亡赔偿中消极损害的内容,我国学界一般认为有扶养丧失说与继承丧失说两种不同的模式,并且这两种模式相互排斥,不能并存。这一看似合理、并有各国立法例支持的认识实际上存在很大问题。事实上,兼采扶养丧失说与继承丧失说并没有不可逾越的理论障碍。立法例上所谓的大多国家/地区均采扶养丧失说也只是学说上的一种概括,具体到各个国家/地区,均有所不同,没有必然的参考意义。相反,在我国,继承利益历来受到重视,因而将其与扶养利益分开,同时设立扶养利益与继承利益两个赔偿项目,具有重要意义。因此在我国,兼采扶养丧失说与继承丧失说更为合适。As to the contents concerning indirect damage in compensation for death, the jurisprudential circle generally hold two different theories, namely, loss of support theory and loss of inheritance theory, and the two theories are believed to be mutually exclusive. It seems that this phenomenon is reasonable and can be il lustrated by instances of legislation of many countries. Actually, this is a grave mistake. In fact, there is no in surmountable barrier between the two theories. The instances of legislation that the loss of support theory is widely adopted by many countries are merely an academic generalization. The situation is different in different counties. Therefore, the foreign country＇ s experiences are not necessarily used as references. On the contrary, great importance has always been attached to inheritance interests, so that it is significant to ＇establish compen sations for both the loss of support and the loss of inheritance. In China, adopting the two theories simultane ously is appropriate.

关 键 词：死亡赔偿 扶养丧失说 继承丧失说 固有损害主义 

分 类 号：DF522[政治法律—民商法学]