侵权防御性请求权扩张适用的法理证成与规则构造  

The Legal Justification and Rule Construction of the Expansion of Defensive Claims for Infringement

作　　者：刘媛媛 Liu Yuanyuan

机构地区：[1]浙江财经大学法学院

出　　处：《环球法律评论》2025年第2期55-70,共16页Global Law Review

基　　金：2023年度国家社会科学基金一般项目“侵权防御性请求权的理论构造及实践路径研究”(23BFX066)的研究成果。

摘　　要：《民法典》第1167条吸纳了物权请求权所持有的防御性元素,在不以过错为要件的前提下,将防御性效力辐射至绝对权之外的其他合法权益,实现了损害预防原理的本土演进。但依国内学术界多数观点,侵权法上存在绝对权侵害的防御性救济,而不存在独立于绝对权救济手段的一般性防御性请求权。对绝对权之外的其他权益采否定适用之态度,显然过度夸大了绝对权与其他权益的区别,防御性请求权并非绝对权专属,妨害与侵害有着共同的指向客体,除去绝对权,一切权益都有被妨害和侵害的可能。所以,侵权防御性请求权的保护范围应突破绝对权之范畴,扩张至其他权益,此举不仅是完善侵权救济体系的内在要求,其救济方式的多样性在保障实质正义的同时,较之损害赔偿更具效率优势。为防止该请求权侵入损害赔偿法领域,扩张适用的具体构造应更难满足绝对权救济的防御性请求,即在坚持行为违法性,对妨害作“直接性”限制的同时,还须特别注重妨害排除效果的衡量。A defensive claim aims to eliminate existing obstacles and prevent future obstacles from occurring. It can be said that this request is essentially created to avoid a possible and urgent danger based on the concept of preventive rights protection and serves as a forward-looking request for future behavioral incentives. Article 1167 of the Civil Code establishes the defensive claim right in tort law to avoid the victim's reliance on legal remedies that only have a suppressive and confrontational effect in cases and realize, to a certain extent, the local evolution of the principle of damage prevention. However, according to the mainstream domestic academic opinion, there is a defensive relief for absolute right infringement in tort law, but no general defensive claim independent of the means of redress for absolute rights. This is obviously an overstatement of the difference between absolute rights and other legal interests. Defensive claim is not exclusive to absolute rights;obstruction and infringement have common objects, and all rights and interests except for absolute rights can be obstructed or infringed upon. Therefore, the scope of protection of tort defensive claims should not be limited to absolute rights but should be expanded to include other legal interests, which is necessary not merely for improving the tort relief system. In fact, the diversity of the content of the defensive relief, while ensuring the substantive justice, can better realize the value of efficiency than the right to claim compensation for damages. To give play to the preventive function of the right to claim, arrangements should be made for the specific construction of the expansive application different from that of the defensive relief for absolute rights. Firstly, the illegality of other rights and interests beyond absolute rights can essentially be regarded as exceeding reasonable limits, which can be comprehensively judged from the aspects of interchangeability, preventive measures, and the infringer's perception of illegality

关 键 词：侵权防御性请求权 妨害排除 妨害防止 违法性 利益衡量 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]