论物之使用利益丧失的侵权损害赔偿  

Infringement Damage Compensation of Loss of Use of the Object

作　　者：林志强 Lin Zhiqiang

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学法律学院

出　　处：《南大法学》2023年第5期140-158,共19页NanJing University Law Journal

基　　金：国家社科基金后期资助项目(22FFXB029);华东政法大学第二届优秀研究生导学团队培育项目(2023-YJSDX-006)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：物之抽象使用利益丧失在我国法上无法得到赔偿,缘于其既非“利益说”下的财产损害,也非法律明文规定的非财产损害。鉴于该问题之解决涉及损害赔偿法诸多核心问题,故有必要作体系梳理。在体系架构上,应舍弃以“利益说”确定的“财产差额”损害概念,改采以“差额假设”确定的“状态差”损害概念;在内容解释上,应认为恢复原状请求权存在与否取决于被侵害人主张的时点,《民法典》第1183条对非财产损害的金钱赔偿采非限定主义,《道交损害司法解释》第12条第(三)—(四)项应解释为损害计算规则。物之使用利益丧失是被侵害人对物享有的权益被侵害后均会产生的损害,其本身就是一项独立的损害,无须被侵害人实际遭受营业损失或支出替代费用,后两者均是损害的外部体现,其数额至多可作为损害计算的参照。loss of use of object cannot be compensated in the law of our country,because it is neither the pecuniary damage under the“Interest-Theory,”nor the non-pecuniary damage recognized legally.Because the solution to this problem involves many core issues of the Law of Damages,it needs to be sorted out systematically.In terms of system architecture,the damage concept of“pecuniary difference”determined by the“Interest Theory”should be abandoned,and the concept of“state difference”damage determined by the“difference hypothesis”should be adopted.In terms of content interpretation,it should be considered that the existence of the right to restitution depends on the time when the infringed person claims the right.Article 1183 of the Civil Code adopts a non-restrictive approach to monetary compensation for non-property damage.Subparagraph 3 and 4 of Article 12 of the“Judicial Interpretation of Road Traffic Accident Damages”should be interpreted as damage calculation rules.Loss of use is a damage that will occur after the right of the infringed person to the object is infringed.It is an independent damage in itself,and does not require the infringed person to actually suffer operating losses or pay replacement costs.The latter two are external manifestations of damage,and their amounts can at most be used as a reference for damage calculation.

关 键 词：物之使用利益丧失 损害赔偿 利益说 状态差 应予赔偿的损害 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]