大规模损害的民法归责

大规模损害(可能是由某种单一的原因或一系列同质的原因引起)的实质性特征在于受害者之众多。然而,在民法中占据主导地位的是个体损害的个别归责。因此,在传统民法关于损害赔偿的理论中,大规模损害的归责问题将在使责任成立的因果关系和满足责任的因果关系及相应的举证责任分配框架下得以解决。在大规模轻微损害的案件群中,考虑到败诉风险和诉讼成本问题,受害人缺乏理性的诉讼利益促使其提起诉讼,而侵害人却因为受害人的众多而享受着可观的收益。为了有效制止企业的不正当行为,应当引入利润追缴之诉。而在真正的大规模损害中,即个人的损失相对较大时,则需要从诉讼经济的角度加以解决。要使私人权利实现便捷化、减轻审判压力,可以在程序上对个人诉讼请求“打包”统一处理,如集体诉讼或代表人诉讼。此外当然也存在法庭外的纠纷解决途径,如斡旋、调解或者仲裁。在民事责任法的框架之外还存在无法被归于任何权利主体的所谓的经济损害。就环境损害而言,存在两种规制模式:将受损害的个人的损害赔偿请求权扩张至恢复原状的费用,或者把纯粹的经济损害作为集体性的,即社会整体所遭受的损害。

大规模环境损害区分救济比较研究

在大规模环境损害中,生态环境的破坏涵盖国家、私人以及公共利益等多重利益损害。细分不同的权益主体,确定各自的索赔依据,能够实现对生态环境损害的充分救济。可以通过立法确定国家机关索赔处于优先顺位,只有在国家机关怠于行使索赔权的情形下,才由社会组织主张赔偿。将自然资源损失导致的经营收益和生计损失确定为普通民事主体的财产权益,自然人可以就此提出赔偿。

风险社会大规模损害责任法的范式重构——从侵权赔偿到成本分担

风险社会是人类利用科技从事创造活动而产生的人为风险成为影响人类生活乃至生存和发展的主要因素的社会,如何缓解与分配风险损害成为风险社会的核心问题。风险社会的大规模损害以事故型和累积型大规模公害为主导。侵权法解决的损害问题是私人对私人利益的侵害,其主要功能在于补偿受害者,其制度运行有赖于损害的确定性、有限性、可计量性、可预期和可控制性、私人性。风险损害所具有的不确定性、无限性、不可计量性、不可预期性、不可控制性和社会公共性颠覆了这些条件,对风险损害主要以规制法予以事前防范。规制法防治私人对公共利益的侵害,其主要通过事前预防责任的分担降低风险损害,事后责任作为补充。规制法责任的实质是对风险成本的分担。分担应遵循社会分担、有效分担、平衡分担以及预防为主、救济为辅的原则。规制法的责任制度包括预防责任和补救责任。

国外大规模侵权损害赔偿制度之启示

目前世界各国针对环境侵权、产品责任等较为典型的大规模侵权现象出台了较为成熟的相关立法以及判例,同时针对大规模侵权损害赔偿适用的救济途径也呈现多样化,有助于充分保护受害人的合法权益能够得到合理的救济。因此,借鉴各国的大规模侵权损害赔偿制度,取其精华,并结合我国的实际情况制定相关的损害赔偿制度,以期能为我国的司法活动提供有益的借鉴。

Limb symmetry index in competitive alpine ski racers:Reference values and injury risk identification according to age-related performance levels

Purpose： The aims of this study were to assess differences of limb symmetry index （LSI） in strength- and coordination-related tasks between high-level, competitive, noninjured ski racers of different age-related performance levels and to prospectively assess limb differences as a possible risk factor for traumatic and overuse injury in youth ski racers. Methods： The study （Study 1） included 285 high-level competitive ski racers （125 females, 160 males） of 3 age-related performance levels and based on the school system： 95 youth （10-14 years, secondary modem school）, 107 adolescent （15-19 years, grammar school）, and 83 elite athletes （20-34 years）. To investigate the second aim （Study 2）, 67 of the 95 youth athletes were included and any traumatic or overuse injuries were prospectively recorded over 2 seasons. All athletes performed 4 unilateral tests （strength related： one-leg counter movement jump （OL-CMJ） and one-leg isometric/isokinetic press strength test （OL-ILS）; coordination related： one-leg stability test （OL-ST） and one-leg speedy jump test （OL-SJ））. The LSI was calculated by dividing the dominant leg by the nondominant leg and multiplying by 100. Kruskal-Wallis H tests and binary logistic regression analyses were conducted. Results： There were significant differences between the LSI of the 3 age-related performance-level groups only in the strength-related tests： the OL-CMJ （X^2（2, 285） = 9.09; p = 0.01） and the OL-ILS （X^2（2,285） = 14.79; p 〈 0.01）. The LSI for OL-ILS was found to be a significant risk factor for traumatic injury in youth ski racers （Wald = 7.08; p 〈 0.01）. No significant risk factors were found for overuse injuries. Conclusion： Younger athletes display slightly greater LSI values only in the strength-related tests. The cut-off value of limb differences of 〈 10% for return to sport decisions seems to be appropriate for elite athletes, but for youth and adolescent athletes it has to be critically discussed. It seems to be necessary to define thresholds based on specific performance tasks （strength vs. coordination related） rather than on generalizations, and age-related performance levels must be considered. Limb differences in unilateral leg extension strength represent a significant injury risk factor in youth ski racers.2018 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Shanghai University of Sport. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license. （http：//creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/）.