论乡村旅游中违反安全保障义务的侵权责任  

On the Tort Liability for Violating Security Obligations in Rural Tourism

作　　者：吴双 WU Shuang(Shanghai University of International Business and Economics,Shanghai 201620,China)

机构地区：[1]上海对外经贸大学,上海201620

出　　处：《东北农业大学学报(社会科学版)》2025年第1期66-75,共10页Journal of Northeast Agricultural University:Social Science Edition

基　　金：中国法学会民法学研究会2023年青年学者研究项目“数字经济背景下违反安全保障义务的侵权责任研究”(2023MFXH002)。

摘　　要：最高人民法院指导性案例140号对乡村旅游安全保障责任的法律适用具有里程碑式的指导意义。安全保障侵权责任须因“危险源非属自身的不作为侵权”引发,安全保障义务人自创危险的作为侵权不应纳入安全保障责任。未尽到安全保障义务与受害人遭受损害之间不具有相当因果关系,该特殊因果关系的成立条件是安全保障义务人未切断正在发生的“风险现实化”因果关系链条。在满足构成要件的前提下,若致害风险源于自然力或受害人而不涉及第三人介入时,安全保障义务人承担与自身过错相应的责任;若风险源于第三人,则应确定义务人的最大责任限额,义务人在限额范围内承担相应的补充责任,并可以对第三人行使追偿权。Guiding Case No.140 of the Supreme People's Court has milestone significance for the application of laws regarding security assurance responsibilities in rural tourism.Liability for security assurance must arise from"nonfeasance torts where the source of danger does not originate from oneself".Active torts caused by security assurance obligors creating their own dangers should not fall under the scope of security assurance liability.The failure to fulfill security assurance obligations and the victim's harm must lack an adequate causal relationship.The special causal relationship is established when the security assurance obligor fails to sever the ongoing causal chain of"risk actualization".If the constitutive requirements are met,and the risk of harm originates from natural forces or the victim without third-party intervention,the security assurance obligor bears responsibility proportional to their own fault.If the risk originates from a third party,the maximum liability limit of the obligor should be determined,and the obligor will bear corresponding supplementary liability within this limit,with the right to seek recourse from the third party.

关 键 词：安全保障义务 乡村旅游 不作为侵权 法教义学 

分 类 号：D913[政治法律—民商法学]