本文選題：快遞服務(wù) + 損害賠償責(zé)任　； 參考：《山東大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：快遞服務(wù)作為一種新興產(chǎn)業(yè)極大的改變了人們的生活方式,與電子商務(wù)的完美銜接更是給人們帶來了極大的便利。但是需要注意到,我國每年因快遞服務(wù)損害造成的賠償糾紛一直呈現(xiàn)上升趨勢,除了快遞服務(wù)本身基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施不夠完善的原因外,我國目前有關(guān)快遞服務(wù)損害賠償制度也存在立法缺失、效力層次不一的現(xiàn)狀。各快遞服務(wù)企業(yè)自行制定不同的損害賠償標(biāo)準(zhǔn),并且利用快遞服務(wù)運單預(yù)先制定各種免責(zé)條款,使得快遞服務(wù)消費者在遭受損失時很難獲得滿意賠償。即使消費者就快遞服務(wù)企業(yè)侵害事由訴至法院,卻由于法律不夠明確統(tǒng)一,各法院法官在行使自由裁量權(quán)時選擇適用法律的不同導(dǎo)致出現(xiàn)同案不同判的結(jié)果,這些混亂使快遞服務(wù)損害賠償問題難以得到有效解決。為了解決這一難題,本文針對快遞服務(wù)損害賠償中的一些最容易引起爭議的問題,如免責(zé)事由、保價限制性賠償條款等進行研究,希望能夠在今后的快遞服務(wù)立法的修訂中起到一定作用,最終達到維護消費者合法權(quán)益的目的。全文分為五個部分,主要包括以下幾個方面：第一章對快遞服務(wù)損害賠償作了概述,并將快遞服務(wù)與傳統(tǒng)郵政普遍服務(wù)損害賠償作了比較,以更加明確區(qū)分快遞服務(wù)損害賠償?shù)奶厥庑浴５诙玛U述了我國快遞服務(wù)損害賠償?shù)默F(xiàn)實狀況,包括當(dāng)前快遞服務(wù)損害賠償?shù)脑蚝突绢愋�。第三章對我國快遞服務(wù)損害賠償?shù)牧⒎ìF(xiàn)狀進行了研究,包括現(xiàn)行有關(guān)快遞服務(wù)損害的法律規(guī)范以及法律框架下的快遞服務(wù)賠償主體、舉證責(zé)任分配、免責(zé)事由等問題。第四章全面分析了快遞服務(wù)損害賠償中的格式條款。從法律對一般格式條款的限制入手,分析了我國快遞服務(wù)運單上有關(guān)快遞服務(wù)損害賠償?shù)母袷綏l款,并重點分析了保價與未保價限制性賠償條款。第五章總結(jié)了我國快遞服務(wù)損害賠償存在的問題,并提出今后在立法中改進的建議,以期能夠更好地維護消費者的合法權(quán)益。
[Abstract]:As a new industry, express service has greatly changed the way of people's life. The perfect connection with electronic commerce has brought great convenience to people. However, it should be noted that the compensation disputes caused by express service damage in our country have been on the rise every year, except that the infrastructure of express service itself is not perfect. In addition, there is a lack of legislation and different levels of effectiveness in the present compensation system for express service damage in our country. The express service enterprises make different compensation standards for damage, and make use of express service waybill to make various exemption clauses in advance so that the express service consumers are difficult to obtain satisfactory compensation in the case of loss. Even if the consumer appealed to the courier to appeal to the courthouse, but because the law was not clear enough, the judges of the court chose the difference of the applicable law when they exercised the discretion, which led to the result of the different cases of the same case. These confusion made it difficult to effectively solve the problem of damage compensation for express service. This paper, aiming at some of the most controversial issues in the damage compensation of express service, such as the disclaimer and the restrictive compensation clause, hopes to play a role in the revision of the future express service legislation and ultimately achieve the purpose of safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of consumers. The full text is divided into five parts, mainly including The following aspects: the first chapter gives an overview of the damage compensation for express service, and compares the express service with the traditional postal service damage compensation, so as to make a clearer distinction between the particularity of the damage compensation for express service. The second chapter expounds the actual situation of the compensation for damage of express service in our country, including the damage compensation for the present express service. The third chapter studies the legislative status of the damage compensation for express service in our country, including the current legal norms of express service damage, the subject of express service compensation under the legal framework, the distribution of burden of proof, the disclaimer and so on. The fourth chapter analyzes the format of the damage compensation for Express service. From the limitation of the general form clause of the law, the article analyzes the formatted clauses of express service damage compensation on express service in our country, and focuses on the analysis of the insurance price and the uninsured restrictive compensation clause. The fifth chapter summarizes the problems existing in the damage compensation of express service in our country, and puts forward some suggestions for improving the legislation in the future. In order to better safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D923.6

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 余大偉;;新郵政法現(xiàn)霸王條款[J];法人雜志;2009年05期

2 蔡辰琳;;試析日常快遞中消費者利益的法律保護[J];法制與社會;2011年10期

3 蘇號朋;唐慧俊;;快遞服務(wù)合同中的消費者權(quán)益保護[J];東方法學(xué);2012年06期

4 李文華;張曉寧;;對完善我國快件損失賠償相關(guān)制度的思考[J];法律適用;2011年04期

5 馬一德;;免除或限制責(zé)任格式條款的效力認定[J];法學(xué);2014年11期

6 史泉;;快遞服務(wù)中消費者權(quán)益保障法律問題研究[J];濟寧學(xué)院學(xué)報;2012年01期

7 劉慶;藍日皎;;違約責(zé)任中的精神損害賠償制度[J];哈爾濱商業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2014年04期

8 任秀潔;;格式合同免責(zé)條款的提請注意義務(wù)[J];商場現(xiàn)代化;2007年09期

9 張瑩;;淺析快遞服務(wù)糾紛的相關(guān)法律問題[J];商業(yè)文化(下半月);2012年03期

10 張毅;賈玉平;;關(guān)于郵件損失賠償制度的思考[J];郵政研究;2007年01期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 趙曉志;論快遞合同承運人審核托寄物價值的義務(wù)[D];廣西師范大學(xué);2012年

2 尹文燕;快遞服務(wù)中損害賠償?shù)姆蓡栴}研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號：2096515