本文關鍵詞： 無權占有 占有物侵權 所有人責任 占有人責任 折中主義　出處：《上海師范大學》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：近年來,在物件占有與所有分離期間,無權占有人的占有物致人損害事件頻發(fā),查閱我國《民法通則》、《物權法》以及《侵權責任法》等相關法律法規(guī),對此類侵權行為并無明確規(guī)定,更缺少無權占有人的占有物致人損害方面的相關立法。縱觀國內(nèi)學者對于占有物侵權的研究成果,在無權占有人的占有物致人損害方面,至今也沒有學者進行清晰的界定和系統(tǒng)的研究。針對我國這一現(xiàn)狀,對比國內(nèi)外相關立法上存在的差異,可以發(fā)現(xiàn)國外對于無權占有人的占有物致人損害這一問題,主要有三種代表性的立法經(jīng)驗:以法國法和瑞士法為代表的所有人負責主義、以德國法為代表的占有人負責主義以及以日本法為代表的折中主義。通過對這三種立法經(jīng)驗的理論基礎及適用加以分析比較,結合我國的司法實踐,本文主要從法律用語、歸責原則、侵權形態(tài)三個方面提出了對無權占有期間占有物致人損害這一問題應當如何完善的相關建議,以期維護被侵權人的相關合法權益。由于我國立法關于無權占有人的占有物侵權并無詳盡的規(guī)定,在占有與所有脫離的情況下沒有考慮到無權占有人的占有物致人損害的民事責任;在法律用語上,盡管規(guī)定了管理人、使用人等責任主體,但是這些主體之間的范圍及界定并不明確,從而導致了法律用語不規(guī)范,無權占有人與所有人的責任劃分不清晰;另外,我國目前相關立法也沒有規(guī)定無權占有人的占有物侵權的歸責原則以及責任承擔形態(tài)。借鑒國外立法經(jīng)驗,針對我國立法上存在的諸多問題,本文認為要完善無權占有人的占有物致人損害民事責任,首先應當規(guī)范法律用語,統(tǒng)一法律用語,以占有人、持有人代替管理人和使用人;其次對于無權占有人以及所有人的責任應根據(jù)無權占有物的不同性質(zhì)進行合理劃分;在歸責原則上,也應根據(jù)占有物的不同性質(zhì)采用不同的歸責原則,對于有生命物一般采取無過錯責任原則,而對于無生命物,以過錯責任為原則;最后對于侵權責任形態(tài)以及抗辯事由進行合理的完善建議,所有人和無權占有人承擔連帶責任。筆者認為,無權占有期間占有物致人損害的案件頻發(fā),必須完善立法規(guī)定,才能真正解決無權占有人的占有物致人損害民事責任當前存在的一些不足。
[Abstract]:In recent years, during the period of separation of possession and possession of objects, damage events caused by possession of unauthorized occupants occur frequently. Relevant laws and regulations such as General principles of Civil Law, property Law and Tort liability Law of China are consulted. There is no clear stipulation on this kind of tort, and there is no relevant legislation on damage caused by possession of unauthorized possessor. In the aspect of damage caused by possession of unauthorized possessor, the research results of domestic scholars on the infringement of possession are reviewed. There is no clear definition and systematic research by scholars. In view of the present situation of our country, comparing the differences in relevant legislation at home and abroad, we can find that the problem of damage caused by possession of unauthorized occupants in foreign countries can be found. There are three main types of representative legislative experience: universal accountability, represented by French and Swiss law, By analyzing and comparing the theoretical basis and application of the three kinds of legislative experience, combining with the judicial practice of our country, this paper mainly discusses the legal terms, through analyzing and comparing the possessive responsible doctrine represented by German law and the eclectic doctrine represented by Japanese law, and comparing the theoretical basis and application of these three kinds of legislative experiences. The principle of imputation, the form of tort and the relevant suggestions on how to perfect the problem of damage caused by possession during the period of unauthorized possession are put forward. In order to safeguard the relevant legal rights and interests of the infringed person. As there are no detailed provisions on the infringement of the possession of the unauthorized possessor in our legislation, Without taking into account the civil liability for damage caused by the possession of a person who is not entitled to possession in the event of separation from possession; in legal terms, however, the subject of liability, such as the administrator, the user and the like, is provided for, However, the scope and definition of these subjects are not clear, which leads to irregular legal terms and unclear division of responsibilities between the unauthorized possessor and the owner. At present, the relevant legislation of our country has not stipulated the principle of imputation and the form of liability bearing of the infringement of the possession of the unauthorized possessor. Referring to the foreign legislative experience, this paper aims at the problems existing in the legislation of our country. This paper holds that in order to perfect the civil liability for damage caused by the possession of the unauthorized possessor, we should first standardize the legal terms, unify the legal terms, take the place of the manager and the user by the possessor and the holder; Secondly, the responsibility of the unauthorized possessor and the owner should be reasonably divided according to the different nature of the unauthorized possession; in the principle of imputation, different imputation principles should also be adopted according to the different nature of the possession. The principle of no-fault liability is generally adopted for the living thing, and the principle of fault liability is the principle for the inanimate thing. The author believes that there are frequent cases of damage caused by possession during the period of unauthorized possession, so it is necessary to perfect the legislative provisions. Only then can we really solve some shortcomings existing in the civil liability for damage caused by the possession of the unauthorized possessor.
【學位授予單位】：上海師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923.2

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 韓強;;論拋擲物、墜落物致?lián)p責任的限制適用——《侵權責任法》第87條的困境及其破解[J];法律科學(西北政法大學學報);2014年02期

2 韓強;;物件保有人責任研究 以《侵權責任法》第85條為解釋對象[J];中外法學;2013年02期

3 張民安;;“侵權行為的構成要件”抑或“侵權責任的構成要件”之辨——行為人對他人承擔侵權責任條件的稱謂[J];政治與法律;2012年12期

4 季境;;占有制度溯源與現(xiàn)代民法之借鑒[J];國家檢察官學院學報;2012年05期

5 季境;;占有在現(xiàn)代財產(chǎn)制度中的地位申明——一種基于動態(tài)沖突的考察[J];河北法學;2012年06期

6 谷艷輝;;物件損害責任比較法研究[J];東北大學學報(社會科學版);2012年03期

7 楊立新;;論不真正連帶責任類型體系及規(guī)則[J];當代法學;2012年03期

8 張平華;;侵權連帶責任的現(xiàn)實類型[J];法學論壇;2012年02期

9 魏振瀛;;侵權責任方式與歸責事由、歸責原則的關系[J];中國法學;2011年02期

10 陳本寒;艾圍利;;侵權責任法不可抗力適用規(guī)則研究——兼評《侵權責任法》第29條[J];現(xiàn)代法學;2011年01期

相關碩士學位論文 前2條

1 袁劍偉;占有物致人損害的侵權責任[D];湖南大學;2014年

2 馬寧;論無權占有人對占有物致他人損害的侵權責任[D];吉林大學;2010年

，

本文編號：1548686