【摘要】：作為義務(wù)與不作為義務(wù)統(tǒng)稱為行為人承擔(dān)的注意義務(wù)。不作為義務(wù)是指行為人應(yīng)當(dāng)不積極地實(shí)施某些行為以防止他人受到損害。作為義務(wù)則是指行為人要積極地實(shí)施某些行為維護(hù)他人的利益以避免他人遭受不合理的損害。根據(jù)作為義務(wù)與不作為義務(wù)的區(qū)分,得出違反作為義務(wù)導(dǎo)致不作為侵權(quán),違反不作為義務(wù)導(dǎo)致作為侵權(quán)。作為的侵權(quán)行為一直是侵權(quán)行為法領(lǐng)域所重點(diǎn)關(guān)注的對象,而隨著社會糾紛的復(fù)雜化與多樣化,不作為侵權(quán)在侵權(quán)行為法領(lǐng)域越來越受到重視。在一些特殊環(huán)境條件下,我們必須積極地為一些作為義務(wù),不然就要承擔(dān)因損害造成的侵權(quán)責(zé)任。作為義務(wù)在人類社會的一開始僅僅只是受到道德約束,但伴隨社會生活的急速變革,人與人之間發(fā)生的侵權(quán)糾紛越來越復(fù)雜多樣,法律就逐漸將作為義務(wù)納入到其領(lǐng)域內(nèi)。人類社會活動的速度加快及生產(chǎn)生活的精細(xì)度提高使侵權(quán)行為法所保護(hù)的對象不斷擴(kuò)張,新的侵權(quán)行為類型將源源不斷的產(chǎn)生,作為義務(wù)的規(guī)定可以很好地解決這些新型案件。但我國現(xiàn)行法律并沒有對作為義務(wù)以法律條文的方式明確規(guī)定,只是在《侵權(quán)法》和一些民事法律法規(guī)中以零散條文的形式規(guī)定了一些在特定情況下具有特殊關(guān)系的人之間存在的不作為侵權(quán)的作為義務(wù)。本文討論作為義務(wù)的概念,分析什么是作為義務(wù),這是討論作為義務(wù)需要解決的問題。首先,對各國作為義務(wù)的比較考察,主要介紹了作為義務(wù)在各國的立法上的具體體現(xiàn)及比較,研究作為義務(wù)的理論依據(jù)。其次,研究作為義務(wù)產(chǎn)生的各種淵源,作為義務(wù)的來源是探究作為義務(wù)的重要部分,只有研究好了作為義務(wù)的來源才能很好的判定不作為侵權(quán)。還有,要對作為義務(wù)的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行分析,才能判斷作為義務(wù)的有無。最后分析我國作為義務(wù)的現(xiàn)狀并提出完善建議。
[Abstract]:The obligation to act and the obligation of omission are collectively called the duty of care undertaken by the actor. The obligation of omission means that the perpetrator should not actively commit certain acts in order to prevent others from being harmed. The obligation to act means that the actor should actively carry out certain acts to protect the interests of others in order to avoid unreasonable damage to others. According to the distinction between the obligation of act and the obligation of omission, it is concluded that breach of obligation of act leads to tort of omission and breach of obligation of omission leads to tort of act. The act of tort has always been the focus of attention in the field of tort law, and with the complexity and diversification of social disputes, omissions have been paid more and more attention in the field of tort law. Under some special environmental conditions, we must actively act for some obligations, otherwise we will have to bear the tort liability caused by damage. The obligation of act is only restricted by morality at the beginning of human society, but with the rapid change of social life, the disputes of tort between people become more and more complicated and diverse, and the law gradually brings the obligation into its field. The speedup of human social activities and the improvement of the precision of production and life make the objects protected by tort law expand constantly, and the new types of tort will come into being continuously, and these new cases can be solved well as the stipulations of obligations. However, there is no explicit provision in the current law of our country for the act of obligation in the form of legal provisions, Only in the tort law and some civil laws and regulations in the form of piecemeal provisions, some people have a special relationship in a specific situation between the existence of an act of tort obligations. In this paper, we discuss the concept of act obligation and analyze what it is, which is a problem to be solved. First of all, the comparative investigation of the obligations of each country, mainly introduces the specific embodiment and comparison of the obligations of act in the legislation of each country, and studies the theoretical basis of the obligations of as. Secondly, the study of the origin of the obligation of as, as the source of the obligation is an important part of the exploration of the obligation of as, only by studying the source of the obligation of the act can be a good judgment of tort as an act. In addition, it is necessary to analyze the criterion of the obligation of act, so as to judge the existence or absence of the obligation of act. Finally, this paper analyzes the present situation of our country as an obligation and puts forward some suggestions to improve it.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：云南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 張民安;論不作為過錯(cuò)的侵權(quán)責(zé)任[J];法制與社會發(fā)展;2002年05期

，

本文編號：2456394