“产品自伤”之侵权法救济路径的检视与选择

The Review and Selection of the Tort Relief for Product Self-injury

手机爆炸事故的频发引发了对产品自伤问题的进一步关注。利用侵权法实现对产品自伤的损害赔偿,成了并列于合同法救济的新的尝试。产品自伤首先表现为物之所有权的侵害,而区分产品缺陷和所有权侵害的标准的欠缺,且产品自伤亦不符合物权法上所有权侵害类型的外力干扰其功能实现的特征,致产品自伤难以通过所有权侵害获得侵权法的救济。在产品自伤附带损害其他财产的情形中,实务中出现将产品自伤纳入其他财产所有权之中的做法有违法律适用的一般原则。在以"纯经济利益"为解释路径时,《侵权责任法》第四十一条可解释为包含产品自伤的规范,而作为纯经济损失的具体类型,产品自伤获得侵权法的救济需符合缺陷是以危险方式实现的条件,才可缓和其与侵权法归责体系之间的冲突。

A series of mobile phone＇s explosion accidents trigger a new round of attention to the problem of product self-injury.Using tort law to compensate for the damages of product self-injury becomes a new try tied in the law of contract relief.Product self-injury is the violation of the ownership firstly.However,the lack of the standard to distinguish the product defects and the ownership＇s violation,as well as the in-conformity between self-injury and the external interference characteristics of the product ownership＇s violation types,results that it is difficult to pay for the self-injury through the ownership＇s violation. In product self-injury cases resulting in collateral damage to other property,the judicial practice that brings the self-injury into other property ownership＇s violation goes against the law general principles. When using the ＂pure economic interests＂as the path,the tort law article 41 self-injury can be interpreted to include the product self-injury.And as a pure economic loss,it＇s necessary for the product self-injury to get the tort relief to meet the requirements that the defects explosion is in a dangerous way,and can ease the conflict with tort imputation system.