比较法视角下的产品责任法基础问题  

Basic Issue of Product Duty Law in the Perspective of Comparative Law

作　　者：海尔穆特·库齐奥 王竹[2] 张晶[2] 

机构地区：[1]维也纳大学法学院 [2]四川大学法学院

出　　处：《求是学刊》2014年第2期7-14,共8页Seeking Truth

基　　金：国家社科基金青年项目“我国侵权法上公平责任适用研究”,项目编号:11CFX037;教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地项目基金“侵权责任法的若干疑难问题研究”,项目编号:12JJD820015

摘　　要：不同法律体系对产品责任的解决方式显示出某种程度上的相似性,但尚缺乏对建立符合正义原则的产品责任制度这一根本性问题的深入探讨。产品责任涉及合同法与侵权法之间的互动,各国采用了不同的处理模式。从引入严格产品责任的原因和严格产品责任的正当性两个方面分析,产品责任的严格性仍显示出不合理之处,而且将无辜旁观者纳入被保护人的范畴缺乏依据。提供服务的企业和不动产的设计者、建造者不需要承担严格责任,产生了法律制度上的不协调。由于社会保障制度提供了广泛的赔偿保障,严格责任存在的必要性也受到了挑战。建议由生产者承担与企业责任规则类似的过错责任,并适用举证责任倒置。Different legal systems have similarities in dealing with product duty in a certain sense but lack deeper exploration into the basic issue of product duty system which is in accordance with justice principle. Product duty is related to the interaction between contract law and tort law and different countries adopt different ways to deal with it. In light of reason and rightfulness of strict product duty, the strictness of product duty is still improper and lacks basis to include innocent bystand- er into the field of prot6g6e. It is not in accordance with legal system to exclude service providing enterprise, designer of real estate or builder out of strict duty. As social protection system provides extensive compensation, the necessity of strict duty is challenged. It is suggested that the producer shoulder the same responsibility as that of the enterprise and the inversion of citing duty can by ap- plied.

关 键 词：产品责任 严格责任 正当性 过错责任 举证责任倒置 

分 类 号：D913.8[政治法律—民商法学]