“过错冗余”与“有难同当”——以“江歌案”一审判决为例

“Fault Redundancy”and“Sharing Difficulties”——Take the First Instance Judgment of“Jiang Ge Case”as an Example

仅从法律规范视角本身出发,一审法院认定刘暖曦存在过错并无直接明确的依据,要求被告赔偿在法律上也缺乏说服力。传统的法学概念体系很难精确表达一审判决隐含的微妙法律逻辑。但从道义层面而言,引入“过错冗余”和“有难同当”原则,可以为刘暖曦承担适度赔偿责任找到合理性依据。具体而言,“过错冗余”原则以“矫枉必须过正”的方式降低了过错的认定标准;“有难同当”原则实为一种保险制度,当刘暖曦在和江歌面对共同的危险时,就承担了伙伴关系中的保险义务。

Only from the perspective of legal norms,the first instance judgment found that there was no direct evidence to prove Liu Nuanxi’s fault,and there was no basis for the defendant to claim compensation.The traditional legal concept system is difficult to accurately express the subtle legal logic implied in this judgment.However,from the moral level,the introduction of the principles of“fault redundancy”and“sharing difficulties”can find a reasonable basis for Liu Nuanxi to bear appropriate liability for compensation.Specifically,the principle of“fault redundancy”reduces the identification standard of fault in the way of“correction must be too correct”.The principle of“sharing difficulties”is actually an insurance system.When Liu Wenxi and Jiang Ge face common dangers,they assume the insurance obligation in the partnership.