【摘要】：隨著國家的繁榮與富強,我國擁有自用車輛的人數(shù)顯明顯增多,常見于車輛作為交通工具而于各家的門口,亦因此,人們之間的車輛借用與租用關(guān)系就變得非常頻密。在這樣的背景下,一旦發(fā)生交通事故,那么所牽涉的責(zé)任承擔(dān)問題就會交的非常復(fù)雜。對于承擔(dān)責(zé)任的問題,一者關(guān)系到對受損方的實時、公正的救濟,又對社會的和諧產(chǎn)生一定的影響,因此,該類車輛交通事故在侵權(quán)責(zé)任的確定問題上就顯得尤為重要。那么,我們應(yīng)怎么樣去處理該類車輛的侵權(quán)責(zé)任之界定問題呢?《侵權(quán)責(zé)任法》出臺之后,其第四十九條對此做出了明確規(guī)定,然而,我因?qū)υ摲l在的責(zé)任主體和責(zé)任原則的觀點上,爭議相對較大,以至實踐中,該法條之適用也面臨著不少的尷尬局面。在本文交通事故案例中同時出現(xiàn)出租和出借兩種情況,事實上,車輛出租者已經(jīng)完全履行了合同中對承租人的審查義務(wù),并明確約定不得轉(zhuǎn)借車輛,而車輛承租者又將該車輛轉(zhuǎn)借他人使用,在這種情況下有兩個原因,一是沒有阻止車輛實際駕駛?cè)笋{駛車輛,二是違反了與出租者不得轉(zhuǎn)借車輛的約定。該兩種情況中,當事者是否都需要承擔(dān)責(zé)任呢?若要承擔(dān)責(zé)任,則應(yīng)以何種方式承擔(dān)呢?這也是本文研究中的重點方向。本文以交通事故中的侵權(quán)損害案例來研究,根據(jù)相關(guān)的法律知識,侵權(quán)損害責(zé)任的承擔(dān),是以造成他人人身損失為基礎(chǔ),賠償一般以金錢或者實物財產(chǎn)等方式來進行,這是常規(guī)情況下的侵權(quán)賠償。認定車輛出租、出借人及駕駛?cè)顺袚?dān)交通事故侵權(quán)責(zé)任的判定依據(jù)。筆者在對租借車輛交通事故的侵權(quán)責(zé)任研究中,通過詳細的、真實的案例來引發(fā)對整個案件的思考,從而得出一些類似案件的規(guī)律性的解決方案,將帶著以上的問題,通過對引用的案件進行全面分析,嘗試從中找出答案,并從答案中引出一些具有通性的結(jié)論,為今后同類的案例作出有值價的參考。
[Abstract]:With the prosperity and prosperity of our country, the number of people with self-use vehicles in our country has increased obviously, and it is common in vehicles as vehicles at the door of each house. Therefore, the relationship between people borrowing and renting vehicles becomes very frequent. In this context, once there is a traffic accident, the responsibility involved will be very complicated. To bear the responsibility, one is related to the real time, just relief to the injured party, and has certain influence on the harmony of the society. Therefore, it is particularly important to determine the tort liability of this kind of vehicle traffic accident. So, how should we deal with the definition of tort liability of this kind of vehicles? after the introduction of the Tort liability Law, Article 49 of the Tort liability Act makes a clear provision for this, however, From the viewpoint of the subject of responsibility and the principle of responsibility, I have a relatively large controversy, even in practice, the application of this article also faces a lot of awkward situation. In the case of traffic accident in this paper, there are two cases of leasing and lending simultaneously. In fact, the rental of the vehicle has fully fulfilled the obligation of examining the lessee in the contract, and it is explicitly stipulated that the vehicle is not allowed to be lent. In this case, there are two reasons why the vehicle tenant has not prevented the actual driver of the vehicle from driving the vehicle, and the other is a violation of the agreement with the renter not to lend the vehicle. In both cases, should the parties be held liable? If responsibility is to be borne, in what manner should it be taken up? This is also the focus of this study. According to the relevant legal knowledge, the liability for tort damage is based on causing personal losses to others, and compensation is generally carried out in the form of money or real property. This is the normal case of tort compensation. Identify vehicle rental, lenders and drivers to assume the basis of tort liability for traffic accidents. In the study of tortious liability for traffic accidents caused by leased vehicles, the author, through detailed and real cases, leads to the consideration of the whole case, and obtains some regular solutions to similar cases, which will bring the above problems with me. Through the comprehensive analysis of the cited cases, this paper tries to find out the answers from them, and draws some general conclusions from the answers, and makes a valuable reference for the similar cases in the future.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D923

【相似文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條

1 ;軍隊車輛交通事故的特點及預(yù)防對策——總后軍交運輸部第三運輸局姜銳剛局長在全軍預(yù)防車輛交通事故集訓(xùn)上的講話(摘登)[J];汽車運用;2005年11期

2 沈艾中;;大貨車之殤——貨運車輛交通事故高發(fā)的成因及對策[J];公安學(xué)刊(浙江警察學(xué)院學(xué)報);2012年01期

3 武玉民;楊憲斌;王樹華;孫協(xié)勝;;廣州軍區(qū)預(yù)防車輛交通事故集訓(xùn)在桂林舉行[J];汽車運用;2012年03期

4 翟水旺;改革干部用車好[J];w攣胖蕓，

本文編號：2296414