特殊体质侵权损害赔偿的实体审视与方法更迭  

Compensation for Tort Damage involving Special Constitution:Substantive Review and Method Alteration

作　　者：王磊[1] Wang Lei

机构地区：[1]贵州大学法学院,贵州贵阳550025

出　　处：《政治与法律》2020年第7期137-150,共14页Political Science and Law

基　　金：贵州大学引进人才项目“侵权损害赔偿范围的确定路径研究”[项目编号:贵大人基合字(2019)024]资助。

摘　　要：在我国司法实践中有相当数量的裁判对最高人民法院指导案例24号强烈实施了有力的限缩适用,说明被害人特殊体质全然不影响损害的分担并不具有绝对正当性。基于方法论的审视,无论本土还是域外均显示出特殊体质的侵权损害赔偿不应被束缚于素因减责论与素因不考虑原则的立场抉择,而应转向于影响特殊体质损害分担的原理剖析,以问题思维导向的论题学结构实施归纳—诠释学的非演绎衡量。从学说与判例的互动来看,特殊体质损害赔偿的规范原理有四个方面,即素因的重大性、素因的寄与度比例、加害行为违法性程度、加害人过错程度。素因减责与否及范围均取决于这四个原理的“配合解释”,法结论应在各原理的动态权衡中汲取正当性。当然,动态评价的思维模式并非意在解构法教义学,而是对法教义学的补充,权衡结论最终应回归现行法体系,以尊重制定法的拘束力。鉴于过失相抵或类推过失相抵均无辐射特殊体质损害赔偿的法理可能,素因减责的教义学归结最终只能落脚于具有漏洞填补功能的诚信条款。Guiding Case No.24 is strongly restricted in its application in judicial practice,which indicates that there is no absolute justification in the rule that the special constitution of the victim does not affect the sharing of the damage at all.Based on the methodological examination,both the local perspective and the comparative perspective show that the compensation for tort damage involving special constitution should not be bound to position choice between the theory of reducing liability due to special constitution and the principle of not considering special constitution.Instead,the correct approach should be to analyze principles that affects the sharing damage involving special constitution,and carry out induction(the non-deductive measure of hermeneutics)with the topic structure oriented by problematic way of thinking.From the interaction between theories and cases,there are four normative principles of compensation for damage involving special constitution,namely the significance of special constitution;the proportion of special constitution to tort;the degree of illegality of tort;degree of fault of tortfeasor.Whether or not the liability is reduced due to special constitution and the degree of reduction are determined by the"cooperative interpretation"of the four principles,and the legal conclusion should be justified from the dynamic weighing of all principles.Of course,the way of thinking of dynamic evaluation is not intended to deconstruct legal dogmatics but to make a supplement,and the weighing conclusion should be made by returning to the current legal system,so as to respect the binding force of positive laws.Since there is no possibility in the jurisprudence to let contributory negligence or analogical contributory negligence cover the compensation for the damage involving special constitution,the dogmatic conclusion of liability reduction due to special constitution can only be based on the good faith clause which has the function of loophole filling.

关 键 词：特殊体质 指导案例 素因减责 素因不考虑原则 侵权行为法 

分 类 号：DF529[政治法律—民商法学]