论比较过失  

On Comparative Negligence

作　　者：王利明[1] Wang Liming

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学法学院,北京100872

出　　处：《法律科学（西北政法大学学报）》2022年第2期34-46,共13页Science of Law：Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law

摘　　要：英美法的比较过失和大陆法的与有过失(过失相抵)存在明显的区别。我国《民法典》第1173条的规定实际上借鉴了英美法的比较过失规则,尤其是《民法典》第1173条在与第1174条相结合后,可以构建一个全新的比较过失规则。该规则虽然建立在过错责任的一般条款的基础上,但是不能完全被该一般条款所涵盖,因而具有独立的功能。该规则可以适用于自甘冒险、违反安全保障义务等情形,亦可在严格责任中适用。在损害根本无法避免或者加害人具有故意等情形下可以排除比较过失规则的适用。There is a clear difference between Anglo-American law’s comparative negligence and civil Law and negligence(negligence offset). The provisions of Article 1173 of our country’s Civil Code actually borrowed from the comparative negligence rules of Anglo-American law, especially the combination of Article 1173 of the Civil Code with Article 1174, which can construct a brand new comparative negligence rule. Although this rule is based on the general terms of liability for fault, it cannot be fully covered by the general terms, and therefore has an independent function. The rule can be applied to situations such as self-willing risks, breach of security obligations, etc., or in strict applicable in liability. The application of the comparative negligence rule can be ruled out in situations where the damage cannot be avoided at all or the perpetrator is deliberate.

关 键 词：比较过失 自甘冒险 安全保障义务 

分 类 号：D923.3[政治法律—民商法学]