论好意施惠人侵权责任之减轻——兼评《民法典(草案)》第1217条

On Reduction of the Defendant’s Liability to a Gratuitous Plaintiff:With a Comment on Article 1217 of Civil Code(Bill)

无偿契约中,给予他方利益的行为人责任较一般有偿行为人的责任为轻;与此相类,好意施惠人所承担的责任一般也应有所减轻。但此处的减轻应有两层含义:一是行为人仅有轻过失时是否需要负责?二是存在重大过失时,责任的范围是否应有所限制?本文基于对司法实践的实证研究,指出我国法院并未明确区分行为人的轻重过失,亦不赞同责任成立意义上的减轻,但在减少责任数额上则取得了比较一致的认识。在此基础上,本文讨论了责任范围之减轻的规范依据,并从方法论角度分析了法官所为之法律续造。证成侵权责任减轻比较妥当的规范依据应当是总则部分的"公平原则"条款。

For a gratuitous contract,the party who benefits the other shall bear less liability than parties to an onerous contract;which is true to the defendant’s liability to a gratuitous plaintiff in gentlemen’s agreement. We can develop this idea,that is to say the reduction of liability,in two dimensions. First,shall a defendant with ordinary negligence be liable? Second,shall those who have gross negligence or recklessness indemnify all of the loss the plaintiff suffered? In other words,may such a defendant claim to pay a less amount of compensation? Based on empirical research on judicial practice,this paper reveals that our courts tend not to distinguish ordinary negligence from a gross one,and to refuse to relieve thoroughly the defendant’s liability even if he merely has ordinary negligence;however,courts agree on reduction of the amount of indemnification. Finally,I discusses the legal rules whereby courts can justify this reduction,and interpretative approach to fix the gap in law.