摘要
《侵权责任法》第10条并非一个纯正的共同危险行为法条,依据加害人是否确定,在结构上可将其分为两个部分。但其中前一部分与该法第11、12条相关的责任设置并不合理。一般责任和连带责任的归责基础和免责事由均不相同。共同危险行为人承担责任的基础是行为人的主观可责难性和行为的客观危险性,承担连带责任的基础是具有客观危险性的行为之间存在的关联共同。行为与损害之间不存在因果关系只能免除连带责任,如果行为人不能证明其行为不具有客观危险性,仍需承担均等份额内的按份责任,其余不能举证证明行为与损害不存在因果关系的行为人对剩余份额承担连带责任。
The article 10 of Chinese Tort Liability Law is not a pure article about joint dangerous act. It can be divided into two parts on the bases of whether the injurer is found. The fist part of this article contains article 11 and article 12, as well as a loophole in legislation. The set of the liability between the two parts is not reasonable. There are different attribution basis and exemptions between general liability and joint liability. The attribution basis of general liability is the private wrong and the risk itself; while the attribution basis of joint liability is the connection joint of the dangerous act of each doer. The doer who can prove his act dose not have a causation with the damage need not undertake joint and several liability, considering the risk itself, this doer still needs to undertake proportionate liability, the other doers undertake joint and several liability.
出处
《西南政法大学学报》
2014年第3期86-95,共10页
Journal of Southwest University of Political Science and Law
关键词
共同危险行为
归责基础
免责事由
连带责任
解构与重构
joint dangerous cat
attribution basis
exemptions
joint and several liabilities
deconstruction and reconstruction