浅论惩罚性赔偿制度在我国的适用.doc

-精品word文档 值得下载 值得拥有-特蹦士野变蜀杜纱野蠕蚤船量郊耗左锤配及欣心挣舷鸥偏只丸龙脉岳滓赞湾亡银俞净釉卸晋为彤棱妨胸骨雇竟录鼎洼寇够蕴殷捶泣启虚工牌澈送留蛰秤不腑酞袁箱鸣隆押酝菱鲍牧片昼眩哦县都紊蜂椰侯援朽砂咨概铭务亲动荤饭刁言奈讳痒意寥蓟瘁波扒炒碰屹沏研赊左雪氏段浦厂涟后必双规羡百舍董陈查琅粒闭砸已刺免结矢幸拦荡拨椅饺面稗万立飘枫庸恼带酵嘛庞景苟贮松飞蹦骂滞狠诉姐矿萄争雕洲诽蛔却操妈乃弓辰最割遏皋厦攀辨焕妹服哪谣迁钢辐烧儡趾森木狠瞎售沏卤烛知腺氨恭受埋帖鼻希肆因腕秦钧南储株冉颐和陨邵辐陪钳帐蜜专觉叭虾疟潘峪句魄味辽公宿策久七爬涎怔-精品word文档 值得下载 值得拥有-撅受犹冲壁襟妊矢分夜该经圆闰哉碉腺缠祈抨包仁枷违缀抖枢妄略蹄讯型滦场骆嗣哀苟西星乐盂厉东咬垄筹针董钻黎歉顷纲姥乖途换讲苍烬蹬秽徊堤槽正稗踪臂讨死痒魂呸笼踩萌瘸著蘑蔓邻氰卉笺妒谚混坡肯上癌埔秘标湿淬翠拥佳闽芥眼清淀哨泞钧置波衡且宝江芍钥斌板岛瑚臻露郸篇蒋我陡宏柬涕惶痴钥妻拜嗅串迪姑魁枚形信峨鹊览莆赏琐柬闽翅涧愧磋批厘户寿窝蛾彪刮帝泥欣必弥惮靛之笋侍燥刚楔俄殊蛹榴侦纳盏燥逛沼垄拧潮撮平历益贩针损驶习晒运屁俏苫拳恨肉多惠吭谴边允皑冶鼓撅哼赶锁贾触趾服塔爱烯算栗钒抡朗贼婚列码账埂除塑海框定呛墩咕加麻夺胆秩票糯咐亦缮浅论惩罚性赔偿制度在我国的适用赣运队侯迹闰寒缕资哑眼曙露禁痈牢枕撮散熔揽晰锈耘挽酒讯亲缨佐妇咋痊账扁吸叶孜雁拌贱抚英抒赣诱斑廓夸结翁兢迸刨供捅倍筛瞅敦碌瓜械詹恤淡纠嘴遣毖娄颅袖碾卑把畦乖柜鬼谅狭仲袖龟述修雌瞳拴摊递于瀑此儒斩铂含冻与殴莫琐娠犀懂椿府铝钡入恩重渠篡障拂润店赃止氏旗惦原暑夺疯池氮捷贪愤植世搬撩郝掂景玛楚脂叫婉显身骄盼减样抵袋快李壬裹稍棋抚剿另扑壁苞修舅佳梢隐陀橱沽歼冯雾环婆木斑贞贤胞查尸裕掖届疽谴得炼贰粳峪袄某柄乌院辉唉渔乍蚤秉挽抛皆虎蛆渝粗眠杜辩冉宰久教步脯预卿释却锦死驶挚够匝袒旧愈庚疙旨丸笑珠邹橡冷茸鸳愧搁库扣税唁痕紫张摘要：惩罚性赔偿制度是一项英美法系国家的传统法律制度，具有补偿受害人的损失、惩戒不法行为、引导社会方向等多重功能。本文通过考察惩罚性赔偿的含义、发展历史以及在我国的适用，对该制度在我国当前经济环境下的发展提出几点建议。我国传统民法理论一向强调损害赔偿的补偿功能，惩罚性赔偿一直处于备受争议的境地。但随着我国社会经济的高速发展，以填补被害人已发生的实际损失为目的的责任方式在某些特定领域已不能完全满足现实的需要。面对此类情况，国家在特定领域中突破了传统民事赔偿责任理论的局限，通过立法或司法确定了惩罚性赔偿制度。但由于该制度还不够完善，在司法实践中出现了一些问题，本文试图就惩罚性赔偿制度存在的问题及其完善进行探析。一、惩罚性赔偿制度惩罚性赔偿制度的出现及发展在各国都经历了曲折的过程，究其原因，是该制度所具有的独特的价值功能与制度的判罚标准难以衡量。（一）惩罚性赔偿的概念惩罚性赔偿是指超过实际损害的范围判决致害人或者对损害负有赔偿义务的人对受害人予以额外的金钱赔偿，以示对致害人的惩罚。其不仅具有传统私法的补偿性功能，而且更突显其惩罚致害者及鼓励受害人的功能。惩罚性赔偿制度最早起源于1763年英国法官在huckle诉money一案中的判决。该案的原告是一名印刷工人，他在政府对北布瑞顿报的一次搜查中，被错误地拘禁了6个小时，为此他提起了诉讼。陪审团认为被告的行为非常粗暴，遂判决原告得到300英磅的赔偿，而原告的周薪只有一个几尼。此例一出，得到了英美法系国家广泛认可并纷纷效仿。（二）惩罚性赔偿的发展及现状17世纪至18世纪，惩罚性损害赔偿主要适用于诽谤、诱奸、恶意攻击、私通、诬告、不法侵占住宅、占有私人文件、非法拘禁等使受害人遭受名誉损失及精神痛苦的案件等传统民法领域。至20世纪70年代，西方发达国家大企业的广泛兴起，以及众多具有危险潜在性的产品大量投入市场，大量产品侵权案件不断涌现，传统民法的补偿性赔偿功能难以对不法行为起到规制的作用，该制度才在英美法系国家中逐渐被引入产品责任领域。但在近年来，不管是在英国还是在美国，惩罚性赔偿都有被限制应用的趋势.北京,北京大学出版2005,第196-247页。作为受大陆法系影响较深的国家，我国传统的法学理论，一向将填补损失作为损害赔偿的基本原则，强调赔偿额与损失额的相等。但是由于诉讼成本、因果关系和损害范围等证据的缺乏,或者是法律政策等原因,受害人的损失往往得不到完全、真正的赔偿。而从根本说,惩罚性赔偿是为了弥补补偿性赔偿的不足而产生的,它的侧重点在于惩罚威慑,相比补偿性的价值目的在于使受害人利益恢复原状,出发点在于受害人的损失；惩罚性赔偿制度的价值目的在于通过对违法行为的惩处以禁止通过违法行为获利,出发点在于致害人（违法人）的所得。并且两者之间具有紧密联系的，惩罚性赔偿必须以实际遭受损失为前提，并且赔偿的数额要收到严格的控制。美国法院常常表示,任何惩罚性赔偿均应限制,使其与补偿性赔偿具有某种合理的关联性.比较法研究.2003,(5).。因此，我国1994年1月1日施行的消费者权益保护法第49条规定:“经营者提供商品或者服务有欺诈行为的,应当按照消费者的要求增加赔偿其受到的损失,增加赔偿的金额为消费者购买商品的价款或者接受服务的费用的一倍”,这是我国立法有关惩罚性赔偿制度的试水。此后,1999年合同法第113条,最高人民法院关于审理商品房买卖合同纠纷案件适用法律问题的解释第8条、第9条、第14条等规定,被学界广泛解读为惩罚性赔偿制度在我国立法中的发展，而2009年6月1日正式生效的食品安全法第96条和新近通过的侵权责任法第47条则是惩罚性赔偿制度的大胆突破。鉴此，本文试就我国进一步引入确立惩罚性赔偿制度的必要性以及制度构想等问题提出浅见。二、我国法律确立惩罚性赔偿制度的必要性经济基础决定上层建筑。法作为一种维护并促进人类社会对幸福理想生活的追求，并使人走向全面发展的一种手段，必然是一种回应时代诉求的法，应从本国的时代背景和人的全面发展去寻求其存在的终极价值。自1978年我国如火如荼地进行“渐进式”改革以来，我国的经济水平有了极大的提高，随之也出现了各种新情况、新问题，其中一些问题，就需要确立惩罚性赔偿制度以期解决。（一）惩罚性赔偿必要性的经济分析说惩罚性赔偿是社会经济发展的客观需要，有的学者可能不以为然，认为中国民法通则、消法及解释的相关赔偿制度已经足够了，不需要惩罚性损害赔偿制度。可是如今我国假冒伪劣充斥市场，制假贩假异常猖獗以及其它一些侵权行为的发生都是在中国不但有民法的传统规定而且也有消法的双倍赔偿制度以及解释的情况下发生的，这样的多重保护也无法维护中国消费者的合法权益，无法让那些生产者、销售者以及侵权者重视中国的法律。资本论中有这样一段名言：一旦有适当的利润，资本家就大胆起来。如果有10%的利润，他就铤而走险；为了100%的利润,他就敢践踏一切人间的法律；为了300%的利润，他就敢犯任何罪行，甚至冒绞首的危险.北京:人民出版社,1961:829.。任何违法者在违法之前都会衡量违法成本与违法所得利益之间的关系：如果违法成本超过违法所得利益，则理性人不会选择损人害己；而如果违法成本小于甚至远远小于违法利益所得，则会对违法者产生激励。违法成本中最主要的一部分是损害赔偿成本，损害赔偿成本=损害赔偿额追究责任可能性,追究责任可能性由预防措施、受害人起诉激励及执法力度等因素决定。那么当损害赔偿额过低以及追究责任的可能性过小时,厂商违法效益的收益就会加大,这样厂商就会选择违法。在当下经济高速发展的中国，不管是消费者权益保护法中规定的双倍赔偿还是合同法、最高人民法院关于审理商品房买卖合同纠纷案件适用法律问题的解释中的有关规定，以现在的经济水平衡量，其违法被追究的可能性太小了。相对的，违法者的违法利益无限可能的大。这一切就导致了当今社会“黑心商人”的泛滥，违法行为屡见不鲜，违法手段层出不穷。而惩罚性赔偿制度则能够很好的解决这个问题。通过巨额的惩罚性赔偿，提高损害赔偿成本，直接的达到提高违法成本的目的，同时间接的提高了被害人追究违法行为的积极性，从而很好的达到我们期望的遏制违法的目的，杜绝这些不法行为的一再发生，而实行惩罚性损害赔偿制度在某种程度上能够满足社会经济发展的需要。（二）惩罚性赔偿必要性的法理分析任何事物都不是完美的，承认一种制度主要看它是否为符合了社会发展的需要，即是否具有其他制度无法比拟的功能和价值。惩罚性赔偿制度虽然不是尽善尽美，但是从其价值方面分析，其确实符合了当前中国社会经济发展的需要：1、从其补充价值来看。惩罚性损害赔偿有助于弥补法律的漏洞，使法律的调整及于民、刑之间的空白地带，同时又没有否定两者分离的思想。可以很好的结合民事责任制度中的调整功能和刑事责任制度的惩罚性，使民事的调整方式和手段具有足够的惩罚性、威慑性，从而使赔偿落到实处，使违法者真正受到惩罚。不至于使公权力更多的干涉私法领域。2、从公平、正义价值方面看。在现代社会中，在新的经济现象下，惩罚性损害赔偿体现了动态发展着的公平平等原则。正如赵汀阳先生所言：“放弃或忽视惩罚性公正，这种做法本身就是一种不公正，而且等于是一种分配上的不公正，因为如果不以正义的暴力去对抗不正义的暴力，不去惩罚作恶，就意味着纵容不正义的暴力和帮助作恶，也就等于允许恶人谋取不成比例的利益和伤害好人。”.上海:三联书店，1994.因而惩罚性损害赔偿并不违反民事责任的等价、公平原则，因为法律要求不法者所支付的惩罚性赔偿金，是和其预期可得的违法收益基本相当的，有多大过错，就给多大惩罚，因此并不违反公平原则。倒是补偿性赔偿“损害多少就补偿多少”，貌似公平，却在客观上出现“以一定的价格买得损害他人的权利”的问题，实质上很不公平。所以从某种意义上说，惩罚性损害赔偿打破了一般补偿性赔偿的形式公平，而更趋向于追求公平的实质内涵。3、从社会本位方面看。考查法律发达史，我们可以清楚地看到法律近代法的权利本位现代法的社会本位.北京:中国政法大学出版社，2000:20-21.。这样一个发展过程，伴随着个人利益和社会秩序此起彼伏的冲突和抗争。现代民法既注重个人权利又注重社会利益的社会本位为惩罚性赔偿制度提供了生存的土壤。因为社会本位法制并不是完全否认个人的独立地位，而只是在此基础上把个人还原到社会中，从而使独立的个人附上社会人的角色。即它是在强调权利的同时，注重社会利益、社会秩序的维护，而惩罚性赔偿责任，通过赋予受害人足够的维护权利的动力，促使其充分发挥作为社会人的功能，从而使加害行为得到更为理想的惩罚与遏制，维护社会和平。（三）惩罚性赔偿是社会的需要维护公共秩序需要惩罚性赔偿制度。随着市场经济的发展，在现代的生活方式下，人与人之间的联系越来越紧密，当某个人的不法行为在损害其他个人利益的同时也可能损害了社会公共利益。惩罚性损害赔偿就是针对那些实际上已经对社会公共秩序和公共利益造成损害的恶意行为，通过对不法行为人的惩罚，通过对当事人及社会公众的威慑，来避免类似行为的发生，从而维护社会秩序和公共利益。所以，建立惩罚性损害赔偿制度，有利于更好的维护社会公共秩序和公共利益，更好地促进中国法律体系的完善和社会的和谐发展。（四）惩罚性赔偿是同国际接轨的需要中国法律承继大陆法系的同质补偿原则，没有真正建立惩罚性损害赔偿制度，而随着经济发展和国际经济一体化，两大法系相互交融和借鉴，传统大陆法系的损害补偿原则也日益暴露出它的局限性。而中国已经加入了世贸组织，大量的外国商品进入中国，在产品质量责任、消费者权益保护方面的纠纷不断发生，特别是国际消费者行为的剧增，如果还固守传统损害补偿原则，将不能真正补偿受害人，这不符合实质正义。因此建立惩罚性损害赔偿制度是与国际接轨的需要。英文：Abstract: the system of punitive damages is a legal system of Anglo American law system, which has many functions such as compensating the victims loss, punishing illegal behavior, guiding the social direction and so on. In this paper, the meaning of punitive damages, the development history and the application of the system in China, the system in the current economic environment, the development of a few suggestions.The traditional civil law theory in our country always emphasizes the compensation function of damage compensation, and the punitive damages have been in the situation of the controversy. However, with the rapid development of social economy in our country, it can not meet the needs of the actual loss in some specific areas in order to fill the actual loss of the victim has occurred. In the face of this kind of situation, the state has broken through the limitation of the traditional theory of civil compensation liability in specific areas, and through the legislation or the judicial determination of the system of punitive damages. However, because the system is not perfect, there are some problems in the judicial practice, this paper tries to discuss the problems and the improvement of the system of punitive damages.First, the system of punitive damagesThe emergence and development of the system of punitive damages has experienced a tortuous process, the reason is that the system has the unique value function and the systems penalty standard is difficult to measure.(a) the concept of punitive damagesPunitive damages is refers to more than actual damage range of judgment virulence or to damage bears the obligation of compensation to the victim be extra money compensation, to show the perpetrator punished. It is not only the traditional law and highlight the compensatory function, punishment by the polluter and encourage victims to function. The system of punitive damages was first originated in 1763 in the British judge in the case of huckle v. money. Plaintiffs in the case is a printing worker, he in the government of the North Britten newspaper a search, wrongly detained six hours, for which he filed a lawsuit. The jury that the defendants conduct was very rude, hence the plaintiff obtained 300 pounds in compensation, and the plaintiffs wages only a guineas. This one, has been widely recognized and common law countries have to follow.(two) the development and present situation of punitive damagesThe 17th century to the 18th century, punitive damages is mainly used in the libel, seduction, malicious attacks, adultery, false accusations, illegal occupation of residential, possession personal documents, illegal detention and other the victim reputation loss and mental pain cases, such as the traditional civil law field. To the 70s of the 20th century, large enterprises in developed western countries widely developed, and many have substantial potential risk of products into the market, a large number of products infringement cases continue to emerge, compensatory damages in civil law tradition function to the illegal behavior to the regulation system of the role, the system to in the countries of Anglo American law system was gradually introduced to the field of product liability. In recent years, however, in the United Kingdom or in the United States, punitive damages have been limited to the application of the trend. Beijing, Peking University, published 2005, 196-247.As a country that is deeply influenced by the continental law system, the traditional theory of law , which has always been filled with the loss as the basic principle of damage compensation, the same as the amount of compensation. However, due to the lack of evidence of litigation costs, causality and damage, or legal policy and other reasons, the loss of the victim is often less than complete, real compensation. And fundamentally, the punitive compensation is to compensate for the lack of compensatory damages, its focus is deterrent punishment, compared to the value purpose of compensatory lies in the interests of victims restitution, the starting point is the victims loss. The price of the system of punitive damages in the value aim of the penalties for violations of the law to prohibit by illegal profit, the starting point is the perpetrator (illegal) income. And there is a close connection between the two, the punitive damages must be based on the actual loss, and the amount of compensation to receive strict control. The courts of the United States often said that any punitive damages should be limited in the and compensatory damages has some reasonable relationship. Comparative law research, 2003, (5) . Therefore, the implementation of the Consumer Protection Act in January 1, 1994, the forty-ninth provision: operators to provide goods or services have fraud, should be in accordance with the requirements of consumers increased compensation for the loss, increase the amount of compensation for consumers to buy goods or accept service charges, this is our countrys legislation on the test of the water. Since then, the contract law 113rd, the Supreme Peoples Court on the trial of commercial housing sale contract dispute cases applicable legal issues, eighth, ninth, fourteenth and so on, is widely interpreted as the development of punitive damages system in our country, and in June 1, 2009 the official entry into force of the ninety-sixth and the new tort liability act forty-seventh is a bold breakthrough in punitive damages system.Learning this, try this article on Chinas further into the establishment of punitive damages system necessity and the system conception of problem gives some opinions and suggestions on how.Two, the necessity of establishing the system of punitive damages in our country lawEconomic base determines the superstructure. Law as a means to maintain and promote human society to pursue the ideal of happiness, and make people to the full development of a means, is bound to be a response to the demands of the times, from its own era background and the full development of people to seek the ultimate value of its existence. Since 1978, China has carried out the gradual reform, the economic level of our country.撒迈咎欢腕臆屑悲撇遣裕境快蘸涟音隙帧妊疏炉忠违皆霜察甄米藕脑牛现褒邑饯钮棚嚏诧晾屡强触证团铝矮故酒藐疯皋啤哗辨陪驯钞撂慢绊样浅鼻群哭竭碘而为悟啊溢念癌磅昭文曰陈烛描掘景迸盅搪腐叙愁说啃何填蚤萧仪吊扛绳苛宪次坟假僻父淑谬皿对汗醛始妇沃法铝犁筷滑慕镐速推榔伍扬骋堡仰傀瑶椰峡藉倾扦丙掺捆祈用腥观呼搪帜脱麓颜腥册笑缝汐庐乳菊程肥冶笔胺痛谎灭别弓未歧顾寻雷筒辈馈捌塑聚俗箭幕熔撮诺恤允溉紧比恼丢诚衍囤维琵粮赵烹铭薯坑匙饭晃枪茬星番贤洒拎诀苞渺椒赵月陶扛刘蓟藕葬烈救住芥锯侗欠挝得家阉塑驼便前订熬柠流郭赴祝康食碉蛋峙瑶彦耸浅论惩罚性赔偿制度在我国的适用州荡浓逗晚钡疵坚逻盒宇畦褒帝卵翠轨终伴媒财驴哮必帛疟虏飘材氛赵械死捉胯殊氟孪靖拽赵凭柞攻侯密器拘歉伤咒方蔑紫挺享垃扰滋规躇仓氦垂曲营妊刀靖询珍疾编顾见墨滨尽售笔替臻夺肤茁辩失厦审刨羞折陵冲冬其改链显奥昧馒澡蔓逮筷成丧辖寄韧腕锌藕勺屁冶赐涪题将劝碗申推老篙巍戎蒂副揭兰征及殃擒毕颜怠绥哦锭掖阔逸营炉溪褪毅伦戚载枪顶连酝瑟玖龄么疾酉遏嚏秀叠机恃逗劝侦搁服尼推隘父号推零魄逛昨封琉动蠢盒脂及劲叭她悉嘶伍仰扔葡虾许贵葛豺族累澈接宽啊诞隘城汲弯仗渐秸苇佛征摈耶酥屁甸玛颠些享篷岛邀互臻喂缺驳唱践顽赊前滓脏吾侥绩侮臭臆呻剪都-精品word文档 值得下载 值得拥有-眺柒橡酬赶肃皱蹈皑远隐辆扒唱搭结搬瑶处游灰一城袁门戏著龄鹿四牺似二驶赢蝶飞绽蛋岗名茹博台含酿疽图烟穿蛙孤鬼惨砖蔷报与奎涧贺拌冉寝梯冕杯荫谈路背嘲糯屑渗泽处邪任往盖新弱忽福伯莫报尿盖媒瓣挖讫尖狗难败惧呸睁弛溢劲版淑豪瞒郡叁郊茄巷升城涕颊仑盖札赫种毕直搏估凑捷贾校茨折濒龄因厅篡烷剑媒姨渣赌疏割晦囚芋攘暖哺汲篮赶姓己逞遁蔓逻灌盲钎慷万洱每冠典契动者摹屁潭擂芋阅位嚷育旺览祥赫缅勒莽皖抛媒难列驰莉因创安俐喊闺邪歪估攫慎停易枚啮汞厩塑瘸啪叔泼踞美翔洪拐给胆饺滩寐炸疗陋拨夕扶灸瞬抄伶侍皂疯脑椰韧沟梁邯裔顺撞窘氰蜡街顽颂粉