侵权精神损害赔偿责任主体研究——基于机动车交通事故精神损害赔偿司法实践的反思

Study on the Subject of the Tort Liability for Mental Damages: Introspection on the Judicial Practice of Compensation for ental Damages in Traffic Accidents

我国《侵权责任法》、《道路交通安全法》均明确规定,机动车交通事故致人严重损害的,侵权人应当承担物质及精神损害赔偿责任,且侵权人民事责任的承担不因其已承担刑事或行政责任而免除。然而,程序立法关于不受理对刑事被告人精神损害赔偿诉讼的规定,却将刑事被告人排除于侵权精神损害责任主体之外。侵权精神损害赔偿主体范围的实质性限缩,不仅导致现行法条之间的逻辑冲突,诱发了司法不公,更引发了民众对法律价值取向的认识混乱。推动精神损害赔偿主体制度完善的根本在于民事与刑事、实体与程序立法的融合,而在现行法律框架下,明确刑事被告人的雇主、其他共同侵权人以及保险人独立的精神损害赔偿责任亦不失为实现个案公正的可能选择。

Both the Tort Law and the Road Traffic Safety Law prescribed that the infringer shall assume the tort liability for the material and mental damages,where there is an traffic accident caused by motor vehicles and caused severe personal injury. Moreover,the tort liability of the infringer cannot be exempted,even if he / she has assumed the administrative or criminal liability. However,the related legislation of criminal procedure prescribed that the court shall dismiss the case of mental injury compensation against criminal defendant. Thus,a criminal defendant cannot be the subject of tort liability of mental damages according to this prescription. This discrepancy between civil law and criminal procedure law not only leads to the logic conflict among current laws and judicial injustice,but also causes the cognitive confusion among the people regarding to the values of law. In this case,the consistency of civil law and criminal law,and of substantive law and procedure law is the fundamental solution to the problem of the legal system of the subject of the liability for mental damages.However,in the current legal regime,it still can be done to achieve the justice in an individual case by specifying the independent liability for mental damages of the following subjects,including the employer of the criminal defendant,joint tortfeasors and insurer.