侵权责任能力判断标准之辨析  

Studies on the Criteria of Judgment for Tortious Liability Capacity

作　　者：郑晓剑[1] 

机构地区：[1]厦门大学法学院,福建厦门361005

出　　处：《现代法学》2015年第6期59-74,共16页Modern Law Science

基　　金：福建省社会科学规划项目"侵权责任能力制度原理及功能研究"(2014C140);中央高校基本科研业务费项目"法典化背景下民事行为能力制度立法研究"(T2013221005)

摘　　要：比较法上关于侵权责任能力的判断标准主要存在四种具有代表性的模式,即以日本和我国台湾地区"民法"为代表的识别能力标准、以荷兰民法为代表的年龄标准、以德国民法为代表的"年龄+识别能力"标准和以前苏联及俄罗斯民法等为代表的行为能力标准等模式。我国法受到了前苏联模式的广义行为能力的深刻影响,将责任能力纳入到行为能力制度中进行处理,并以行为能力作为责任能力的基本判断标准。但是,这种做法混淆了责任能力与行为能力之间的本质区别,难于对过错责任作出精确判定,也无法妥当说明过错责任之认定及承担的法理逻辑和伦理基础,因而在理论和实践层面均存在诸多的不合理性。我们应当充分借鉴、吸收域外先进经验,在未来的民法典中对现行的责任能力判断标准进行重构,以使相关的立法和理论研究更为精细、科学。There are almost four representative models of judgment criteria for tortuous liability capacity in comparative law,which include the criteria of recognition ability in Japan and Taiwan,the criteria of age in Holland,the criteria of age and recognition ability in Germany,as well as the criteria of capacity for civil conduct in former Soviet Union. China is deeply influenced by the theory of capacity for civil conduct in former Soviet Union. Specifically,China＇s relevant legal norms stipulate capacity for civil conduct as the judgment criteria for tortious liability capacity. But such legislations have confused the essential difference between tortious liability capacity and capacity for civil conduct,which cannot make accurate judgments on fault liability. In addition,it cannot illustrate the legal logic and ethics foundation of judgment and assumption of fault liability in a proper way. So,there are a lot of irrationalities both in theory and practice of such approach. For the sake of refining relevant legislation and research,we should draw on the advanced experience of other countries,and reconstruct the criteria of judgment for tortuous liability capacity in our future civil code.

关 键 词：侵权责任能力 民事行为能力 识别能力 判断标准 

分 类 号：D919.3[医药卫生—法医学]