發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-02-16 19:18

  本文關(guān)鍵詞： 旅行社安全保障義務(wù) 責(zé)任競(jìng)合　出處：《蘭州大學(xué)》2010年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】： 近年來(lái),隨著生活水平的提高,選擇外出旅游的人越來(lái)越多,從而促進(jìn)了旅游行業(yè)的迅猛發(fā)展。然而在旅游過(guò)程中難免會(huì)發(fā)生的意外事故,往往會(huì)給游客帶來(lái)財(cái)產(chǎn)損失,甚至?xí)＜暗接慰偷纳】�。這就涉及到游客與旅行社的旅游糾紛,特別是在糾紛發(fā)生后,旅行社與旅游營(yíng)業(yè)機(jī)構(gòu)往往相互推諉責(zé)任,導(dǎo)致游客的合法權(quán)益得不到及時(shí)的維護(hù)。各地法院在處理有關(guān)旅游糾紛時(shí),對(duì)于同一類型的糾紛做出的處理往往不同,甚至相互矛盾。這對(duì)我國(guó)旅游業(yè)的發(fā)展是很不利的。旅行社對(duì)旅游者的安全保障有什么義務(wù)?當(dāng)旅游者遭受損害時(shí)旅行社要承擔(dān)什么責(zé)任?這是本文涉及的主要問(wèn)題。 本文通過(guò)分析陳淑玲訴西南旅行社一案,論述了旅行社安全保障義務(wù)的性質(zhì)、內(nèi)容以及責(zé)任形式,筆者對(duì)此作出細(xì)致的分析和闡述,以期對(duì)我國(guó)的旅游立法盡微薄之力。 本文共分為五部分： 引言部分分析了陳淑玲訴西南旅行社一案,簡(jiǎn)要地說(shuō)明了安全保障義務(wù)的重要性。 第二部分：主要介紹旅行社安全保障義務(wù)的性質(zhì)和內(nèi)容,筆者認(rèn)為旅行社安全保障義務(wù)以法定義務(wù)為原則,以約定義務(wù)為例外。 第三部分：旅行社違反安全保障義務(wù)的責(zé)任形式,主要有直接責(zé)任、替代責(zé)任和補(bǔ)充責(zé)任三種形式。 第四部分：旅行社違反安全保障義務(wù)時(shí)的責(zé)任競(jìng)合問(wèn)題,重點(diǎn)是責(zé)任競(jìng)合時(shí)請(qǐng)求權(quán)的選擇問(wèn)題。 結(jié)論部分：重申了旅行社安全保障義務(wù)的重要性。
[Abstract]:In recent years, with the improvement of living standards, more and more people choose to go out to travel, thus promoting the rapid development of the tourism industry. It may even endanger the life and health of tourists. This involves tourism disputes between tourists and travel agencies, especially when disputes arise, when travel agencies and tourism agencies often shirk their responsibilities. As a result, the legitimate rights and interests of tourists cannot be safeguarded in a timely manner. When local courts deal with tourism disputes, they often deal with the same type of disputes differently. Even contradictory. This is very unfavorable to the development of tourism in China. What are the obligations of travel agencies to the safety and security of tourists? What is the liability of the travel agency when the tourist suffers damage? This is the main problem involved in this paper. By analyzing the case of Chen Shu-ling v. Southwest Travel Service, this paper discusses the nature, content and responsibility form of the travel agency's duty of safety guarantee. The author makes a detailed analysis and elaboration of this case in order to make a modest contribution to the tourism legislation of our country. This paper is divided into five parts:. The introduction analyzes Chen Shu-ling v. Southwest Travel Service, and briefly explains the importance of security obligations. The second part mainly introduces the nature and content of travel agency's security obligation. The author thinks that travel agency's duty of safety and security is based on the principle of legal obligation, with the exception of contractual obligation. The third part: there are three kinds of liability forms: direct liability, substitute liability and supplementary liability. Part 4th: the problem of the concurrence of liability when the travel agency violates the obligation of safety guarantee, with emphasis on the choice of the right of claim when the liability is competing. Conclusion: the importance of travel agency security obligation is reiterated.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號(hào)】：D923.9

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 唐云龍;旅游經(jīng)營(yíng)者安全保障義務(wù)研究[D];新疆大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：1516247