本文關(guān)鍵詞： 產(chǎn)品缺陷 消費(fèi)者預(yù)期標(biāo)準(zhǔn) 風(fēng)險(xiǎn)效益分析標(biāo)準(zhǔn)　出處：《華東政法大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：美國(guó)的產(chǎn)品缺陷制度歷經(jīng)一百多年的發(fā)展,其理論體系已經(jīng)趨于完備,其為數(shù)眾多的學(xué)者著述以及豐富案例值得加以研究學(xué)習(xí)。本文通過(guò)對(duì)中美產(chǎn)品責(zé)任法中的產(chǎn)品缺陷制度進(jìn)行比較分析,試圖吸收美國(guó)產(chǎn)品缺陷制度的先進(jìn)之處,希望能夠?qū)ξ覈?guó)的產(chǎn)品缺陷制度的立法提供借鑒作用。 本文的導(dǎo)言部分介紹了產(chǎn)品缺陷制度在產(chǎn)品責(zé)任法中的重要性,說(shuō)明了產(chǎn)品缺陷的具體定義以及判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)極大影響對(duì)于產(chǎn)品責(zé)任有無(wú)的認(rèn)定。 文章正文分為兩部分,第一部分著重介紹了美國(guó)的產(chǎn)品缺陷的界定和認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。首先指出美國(guó)產(chǎn)品缺陷的基本含義,其中在產(chǎn)品缺陷的定義方面,文章指出美國(guó)的缺陷定義著眼于不合理危險(xiǎn),而在產(chǎn)品缺陷的類型化分析方面,本文指出美國(guó)的產(chǎn)品缺陷分為三種類型,它們分別是產(chǎn)品制造缺陷、產(chǎn)品設(shè)計(jì)缺陷和產(chǎn)品警示缺陷,并分別介紹了三種缺陷各自的定義及其特點(diǎn)并指出為何這樣分類的緣由。然后通過(guò)介紹分析美國(guó)對(duì)于產(chǎn)品缺陷的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn),總結(jié)出有兩個(gè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)在美國(guó)實(shí)務(wù)界占據(jù)主導(dǎo)地位,它們分別是消費(fèi)者預(yù)期標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和風(fēng)險(xiǎn)效益標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。文中介紹了上述兩種缺陷的內(nèi)涵及其特點(diǎn),也說(shuō)明了對(duì)于不同類型的產(chǎn)品缺陷具體適用何種判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn),并且通過(guò)分析美國(guó)產(chǎn)品缺陷判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的新發(fā)展,指出現(xiàn)階段在美國(guó),風(fēng)險(xiǎn)效益標(biāo)準(zhǔn)已經(jīng)占據(jù)主導(dǎo)地位。 文章第二部分是關(guān)于我國(guó)產(chǎn)品缺陷制度的現(xiàn)狀與完善。首先通過(guò)概括我國(guó)法律關(guān)于產(chǎn)品缺陷的定義及其判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的規(guī)定,指出我國(guó)立法上關(guān)于產(chǎn)品缺陷的規(guī)定極為分散和粗略。然后,文章指出我國(guó)產(chǎn)品缺陷制度的種種不足并分析其成因。關(guān)于不足之處,本文著重說(shuō)明兩點(diǎn),即我國(guó)關(guān)于產(chǎn)品缺陷概念的界定過(guò)于抽象和概括以及我國(guó)產(chǎn)品缺陷的認(rèn)定采取的雙重標(biāo)準(zhǔn)及其不合時(shí)宜。最后,筆者提出了三點(diǎn)建議,它們分別是制定單獨(dú)的產(chǎn)品責(zé)任法以囊括產(chǎn)品缺陷制度、立法上對(duì)產(chǎn)品缺陷進(jìn)行明確分類以及廢除雙重標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。
[Abstract]:After more than 100 years of development, the system of product defects in the United States has become more and more complete. Through comparative analysis of the product defect system between China and the United States, this paper attempts to absorb the advantages of the American product defect system. The author hopes to provide reference for the legislation of product defect system in our country. The introduction of this paper introduces the importance of the product defect system in the product liability law, explains the specific definition of product defect and the determination of whether the judgment standard has great influence on the product liability. The text is divided into two parts. The first part focuses on the definition and identification standard of product defects in the United States. First, it points out the basic meaning of product defects in the United States, including the definition of product defects. In this paper, the author points out that the definition of defects in the United States focuses on unreasonable hazards, and in the analysis of the types of product defects, this paper points out that there are three types of product defects in the United States, which are respectively product manufacturing defects. The product design defect and the product warning defect are introduced, and the definitions and characteristics of the three kinds of defects are introduced respectively, and the reason why they are classified in this way is pointed out. Then, through the introduction and analysis of the American standard for identifying the product defect, It is concluded that two standards are dominant in American practice, they are consumer expectation standard and risk benefit standard respectively. The connotation and characteristics of these two defects are introduced in this paper. By analyzing the new development of the American product defect judgment standard, it is pointed out that the risk benefit standard has already occupied the leading position in the United States at the present stage. The second part of the article is about the present situation and perfection of the product defect system in our country. It is pointed out that the regulations on product defects in our country's legislation are extremely scattered and rough. Then, the article points out the various deficiencies of the product defect system in our country and analyzes its causes. That is, the definition of product defect in our country is too abstract and generalized, and the double standard adopted in the identification of product defect in our country is out of date. Finally, the author puts forward three suggestions. They are to formulate a separate product liability law to cover the product defect system, legislatively categorize product defects and abolish double standards.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D923.8;D971.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 譚志清;論我國(guó)產(chǎn)品責(zé)任立法的完善[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);1998年04期

2 朱克鵬 ,田衛(wèi)紅;論產(chǎn)品責(zé)任法上的產(chǎn)品缺陷[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;1994年06期

3 樊靜;產(chǎn)品缺陷認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的比較研究[J];廣西社會(huì)科學(xué);2003年02期

4 石慧榮;產(chǎn)品缺陷研究[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);1996年02期

5 張騏;在效益與權(quán)利之間——美國(guó)產(chǎn)品責(zé)任法的理論基礎(chǔ)[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);1997年06期

，

本文編號(hào)：1538143