惩罚性赔偿责任的二元体系与规范再造

A System of Dual Punitive Damages and the Standardization in Its Operation

我国惩罚性赔偿责任法律体系已基本建立,形成了违约惩罚性赔偿和侵权惩罚性赔偿二元体系,二者在请求权基础、保护目的、适用条件、法律后果等方面都有较大区别。惩罚性制度突破了传统民法中损害弥补之局限,具有惩罚、激励、威慑功能,是经济法视阈下的独立责任。消费者提起消费欺诈案件既享有撤销合同请求权,也享有惩罚性赔偿请求权,二者并行不悖,最终由消费者选择决定。将消费欺诈的证明标准从“高度盖然性标准”提高到“排除合理怀疑标准”,增加了消费者的举证负担和诉讼成本。并非所有经营者未履行告知义务的情形都构成欺诈行为,经营者告知义务的履行范围应限于足以影响消费者购买产品或服务的关键信息因素之内。要统一惩罚性赔偿立法,通过“抽象指引+类型列举+兜底条款”方式界定消费欺诈行为,并注意欺诈行为的民事赔偿责任与其他责任的有效衔接。

It has been established in China a basic legal system of dual punitive damages,consisting of the one for breach of contract and the other for tort,the two of which differ greatly in the basis of claim,protection purpose,applicable conditions,and legal consequences.Such a system,from the perspective of economic law,is an independent responsibility that goes beyond the limit of the damages in traditional civil law,and fulfills the functions of punishment,incentive and deterrence.Under this system,consumers,in filing consumer fraud cases,shall have the right to either rescind the contract or request punitive damages or both,for the two rights are not mutually exclusive and the choice is ultimately in the hands of the consumers.However,the consumers'burden of proof and litigation costs are increased,if the proof standard for consumer fraud is raised from"the highly probabilistic one"to"the one of excluding reasonable doubt."Also,the scope in the performance of the operator's notification duty shall be limited to key information factors that are sufficient to affect consumers'purchase of products or services,since not all operators'failure to perform the notification duty constitutes fraud.Therefore,the legislation of punitive damages needs to be unified by defining fraud through"abstract guidelines,""type enumeration,""miscellaneous provisions,"and needs to be effectively coordinated with civil liabilities for fraud and other liabilities.