《电子商务法》第38条第2款中的“相应的责任”自将《电子商务法》列入立法规划以来便争议较大,其责任形态的明确一直是司法实践与学术讨论上的焦点。“相应的责任”的责任形态的确立应当以《电子商务法》第32条第2款中的“关系消费者...《电子商务法》第38条第2款中的“相应的责任”自将《电子商务法》列入立法规划以来便争议较大,其责任形态的明确一直是司法实践与学术讨论上的焦点。“相应的责任”的责任形态的确立应当以《电子商务法》第32条第2款中的“关系消费者生命健康的商品或服务”、“资质资格未尽到审核义务”以及“安全保障义务”进行展开,同时应当兼顾立法宗旨与立法体系的连贯。“相应的责任”之责任形态的不清将会影响以责任形态为基础的归责原则与举证责任的分配。责任形态的“相应的责任”应当解释为按份责任的责任形态才能更好地为消费者权益提供保护以及促进电子商务的良好发展。The “corresponding liability” in Article 38, Paragraph 2 of the E-Commerce Law has been controversial since the E-Commerce Law was included in the legislative plan, and the clarification of its liability form has always been the focus of judicial practice and academic discussions. The establishment of the liability form of “corresponding liability” shall be carried out in accordance with the “goods or services related to the life and health of consumers”, “the obligation to review qualifications and qualifications” and “the obligation to ensure security” in paragraph 2 of article 32 of the E-Commerce Law, and shall take into account the coherence of the legislative purpose and the legal system. The ambiguity of the form of liability of “corresponding liability” will affect the principle of attribution and the allocation of the burden of proof based on the form of liability. The “corresponding responsibility” in the form of responsibility should be interpreted as the form of responsibility according to the responsibility, so as to better protect the rights and interests of consumers and promote the sound development of e-commerce.展开更多
电子商务的迅猛发展改变了人们的生活方式,随着电商平台的日益壮大,平台经营者对平台内经营者的管控能力也更强,因而应当承担的注意义务也更重。《电子商务法》第38条第二款规定的“相应责任”这一模糊表达给平台责任的确定带来极大争...电子商务的迅猛发展改变了人们的生活方式,随着电商平台的日益壮大,平台经营者对平台内经营者的管控能力也更强,因而应当承担的注意义务也更重。《电子商务法》第38条第二款规定的“相应责任”这一模糊表达给平台责任的确定带来极大争议。对平台责任的解释可以先确定审核义务和安全保障义务的内容和认定要素,再将“相应责任”限定在民事责任的框架下讨论。现实情况的复杂性决定了具体问题具体分析这一方案,在个案中分析权衡该适用连带责任、按份责任还是补充责任,可以避免平台承担过重或者过轻的责任。The rapid development of e-commerce has changed people’s lifestyles, and with the growing growth of e-commerce platforms, platform operators have a stronger ability to control the operators on the platform, so they should bear a heavier duty of care. The vague expression of “corresponding liability” under the second paragraph of Article 38 of the E-Commerce Law has brought great controversy to the determination of the liability of the platform. The interpretation of the platform’s liability can first determine the content and determination elements of the review obligation and the security guarantee obligation, and then limit the discussion of “corresponding liability” to the framework of civil liability. The complexity of the actual situation determines that this solution should be analyzed on a case-by-case basis, and the analysis and weighing of joint and several liability, share liability or supplementary liability in individual cases can avoid the platform from assuming excessive or light liability.展开更多
文摘《电子商务法》第38条第2款中的“相应的责任”自将《电子商务法》列入立法规划以来便争议较大,其责任形态的明确一直是司法实践与学术讨论上的焦点。“相应的责任”的责任形态的确立应当以《电子商务法》第32条第2款中的“关系消费者生命健康的商品或服务”、“资质资格未尽到审核义务”以及“安全保障义务”进行展开,同时应当兼顾立法宗旨与立法体系的连贯。“相应的责任”之责任形态的不清将会影响以责任形态为基础的归责原则与举证责任的分配。责任形态的“相应的责任”应当解释为按份责任的责任形态才能更好地为消费者权益提供保护以及促进电子商务的良好发展。The “corresponding liability” in Article 38, Paragraph 2 of the E-Commerce Law has been controversial since the E-Commerce Law was included in the legislative plan, and the clarification of its liability form has always been the focus of judicial practice and academic discussions. The establishment of the liability form of “corresponding liability” shall be carried out in accordance with the “goods or services related to the life and health of consumers”, “the obligation to review qualifications and qualifications” and “the obligation to ensure security” in paragraph 2 of article 32 of the E-Commerce Law, and shall take into account the coherence of the legislative purpose and the legal system. The ambiguity of the form of liability of “corresponding liability” will affect the principle of attribution and the allocation of the burden of proof based on the form of liability. The “corresponding responsibility” in the form of responsibility should be interpreted as the form of responsibility according to the responsibility, so as to better protect the rights and interests of consumers and promote the sound development of e-commerce.
文摘电子商务的迅猛发展改变了人们的生活方式,随着电商平台的日益壮大,平台经营者对平台内经营者的管控能力也更强,因而应当承担的注意义务也更重。《电子商务法》第38条第二款规定的“相应责任”这一模糊表达给平台责任的确定带来极大争议。对平台责任的解释可以先确定审核义务和安全保障义务的内容和认定要素,再将“相应责任”限定在民事责任的框架下讨论。现实情况的复杂性决定了具体问题具体分析这一方案,在个案中分析权衡该适用连带责任、按份责任还是补充责任,可以避免平台承担过重或者过轻的责任。The rapid development of e-commerce has changed people’s lifestyles, and with the growing growth of e-commerce platforms, platform operators have a stronger ability to control the operators on the platform, so they should bear a heavier duty of care. The vague expression of “corresponding liability” under the second paragraph of Article 38 of the E-Commerce Law has brought great controversy to the determination of the liability of the platform. The interpretation of the platform’s liability can first determine the content and determination elements of the review obligation and the security guarantee obligation, and then limit the discussion of “corresponding liability” to the framework of civil liability. The complexity of the actual situation determines that this solution should be analyzed on a case-by-case basis, and the analysis and weighing of joint and several liability, share liability or supplementary liability in individual cases can avoid the platform from assuming excessive or light liability.
