發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-04-25 07:15

  本文選題：侵權(quán)法 + 防御請求權(quán)�。� 參考：《寧波大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：我國的《侵權(quán)責(zé)任法》在開篇立法宗旨規(guī)定了我國侵權(quán)法的功能是預(yù)防、制裁侵權(quán),也即我國的侵權(quán)法應(yīng)該是具備防御和懲治的雙重功能。另外,侵權(quán)法還規(guī)定了包括損害賠償在內(nèi)的八種責(zé)任方式,又在第21條規(guī)定了停止侵害、排除妨礙、消除損失三種責(zé)任方式,而這三種方式加在一起被稱為我國侵權(quán)法中的防御請求權(quán),也即立法宗旨中的預(yù)防功能的體現(xiàn)。但是我國的侵權(quán)法中的防御請求權(quán)也僅僅只是體現(xiàn)了這樣一個(gè)條文,并沒有更多的明文細(xì)則或其它輔助條文,這讓我國的防御請求權(quán)在現(xiàn)實(shí)中的適用存在困難,我國的司法實(shí)踐也確實(shí)鮮少有關(guān)于侵權(quán)法中防御請求權(quán)的使用裁判�，F(xiàn)實(shí)生活中,大量的侵權(quán)糾紛案例不斷出現(xiàn),面對不斷出現(xiàn)的新問題,新糾紛,我國侵權(quán)法中的防御請求權(quán)也正不斷暴露出其不足,如何對其進(jìn)行調(diào)整,是立法發(fā)展需要考慮的。就本文來說,本文將對我國侵權(quán)法中的防御請求權(quán)進(jìn)行論述,具體來說,主要分為以下幾個(gè)部分:第一部分是對防御請求權(quán)的概述。本部分主要闡明防御請求權(quán)的概念及其特征,以及防御請求權(quán)在我國立法中的類型以及各種類型的防御請求權(quán)如何行使的問題。第二部分是對我國當(dāng)前侵權(quán)法中防御請求權(quán)的立法與實(shí)踐概況。本部分闡述了我國侵權(quán)法中防御請求權(quán)的立法淵源、我國防御請求權(quán)的立法發(fā)展情況。同時(shí)也就我國司法實(shí)踐中關(guān)于防御請求權(quán)的現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行了大概的論述,闡明了我國當(dāng)前防御請求權(quán)制度在司法實(shí)踐中發(fā)展的不足,防御請求權(quán)在司法實(shí)踐中的適用率過低的問題。第三部分是對我國侵權(quán)法中防御請求權(quán)存在問題的分析。我國防御性請求權(quán)主要存在歸責(zé)原則不清晰、構(gòu)成要件模糊、防御性請求權(quán)的及時(shí)性與有效性無法得到保障的問題等問題。第四部分是就我國防御請求權(quán)的發(fā)展提供更多的意見和建議。此部分的建議是根據(jù)當(dāng)前英美法系與大陸法系國家的防御性請求權(quán)發(fā)展的情況,結(jié)合我國當(dāng)前存在的防御請求權(quán)存在的問題,針對上文提出的問題,有針對性地提出我國的防御性請求權(quán)應(yīng)當(dāng)在歸責(zé)原則上適用無過錯(cuò)原則,構(gòu)成要件上無需過多關(guān)注損害結(jié)果,而是只要可能出現(xiàn)損害的危險(xiǎn)性即可。此外也需要對物上請求權(quán)與防御請求權(quán)作出區(qū)分。
[Abstract]:At the beginning of the legislative purpose of our country's Tort liability Law, it is stipulated that the function of our tort law is to prevent, sanction tort, that is, the tort law of our country should have the dual function of defense and punishment. In addition, the Tort Law also provides for eight forms of liability, including compensation for damages, and in Article 21 provides for the cessation of infringement, the removal of obstruction, and the elimination of three forms of liability for loss. Together, these three ways are called the defense claim in the tort law of our country, that is, the embodiment of the preventive function in the legislative purpose. However, the defense claim in the tort law of our country only embodies such a provision, and there are no more express rules or other auxiliary provisions, which makes the application of the defense claim difficult in reality. The judicial practice of our country is also rare about the use of defense claim in tort law. In real life, a large number of cases of tort disputes continue to appear. In the face of new problems and disputes, the defense claim right in tort law of our country is also exposing its shortcomings, how to adjust it, Legislative development needs to be considered. As far as this article is concerned, this paper will discuss the defense claim in the tort law of our country. Specifically, it can be divided into the following parts: the first part is an overview of the defense claim. This part mainly expounds the concept and characteristics of defense claim, the types of defense claim in Chinese legislation and how to exercise various types of defense claim. The second part is the legislation and practice of defense claim in the current tort law of our country. This part expounds the legislative origin of defense claim in tort law and the legislative development of defense claim in our country. At the same time, it discusses the present situation of defense claim in judicial practice in our country, and expounds the deficiency of the current defense claim system in judicial practice and the problem that the application rate of defense claim is too low in judicial practice. The third part is the analysis of the problem of defense claim in tort law of our country. In our country, the principle of imputation is not clear, the constitution is vague, and the timeliness and validity of defensive claim can not be guaranteed. The fourth part is to provide more opinions and suggestions on the development of defense claims in China. This part of the proposal is based on the current situation of the development of defensive claims in common law and civil law countries, combined with the existing problems of defense claims in China, in view of the problems raised above. It is pointed out that the principle of no-fault should be applied to the principle of imputation of defensive claim in our country, and the result of damage should not be paid too much attention to in the constitutive elements, but as long as the danger of damage may occur. In addition, there is a need to distinguish between the right of claim and the right of defense.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：寧波大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 葉名怡;;論侵權(quán)預(yù)防責(zé)任對傳統(tǒng)侵權(quán)法的挑戰(zhàn)[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2013年02期

2 熊玉婷;;侵權(quán)請求權(quán)若干問題思考[J];河南司法警官職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年01期

3 林其敏;;英國侵權(quán)法上的損害賠償[J];大連海事大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年06期

4 龍俊;;權(quán)益侵害之要件化[J];法學(xué)研究;2010年04期

5 魏振瀛;;侵權(quán)責(zé)任法在我國民法中的地位及其與民法其他部分的關(guān)系——兼與傳統(tǒng)民法相關(guān)問題比較[J];中國法學(xué);2010年02期

6 王洪亮;;論侵權(quán)法中的防御請求權(quán)[J];北方法學(xué);2010年01期

7 陳曉明;;風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì)之刑法應(yīng)對[J];法學(xué)研究;2009年06期

8 張新寶;;侵權(quán)責(zé)任法立法的利益衡量[J];中國法學(xué);2009年04期

9 王軼;;論侵權(quán)責(zé)任承擔(dān)方式[J];中國人民大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2009年03期

10 王洪亮;;妨害排除與損害賠償[J];法學(xué)研究;2009年02期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 苑書濤;請求權(quán)基本理論研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2005年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 張偉華;違約請求權(quán)與侵權(quán)請求權(quán)競合問題研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2010年

2 彭偉;人格權(quán)請求權(quán)和侵權(quán)請求權(quán)關(guān)系初探[D];煙臺(tái)大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：1800317