【摘要】：我國(guó)正處于工業(yè)化中后期,由于交通擁堵和汽車環(huán)境污染日益嚴(yán)重,好意同乘現(xiàn)象日漸普遍。在有的國(guó)家,順路搭乘甚至成為一種常態(tài)的出行方式。我國(guó)駐豫全國(guó)政協(xié)委員金正新建議,設(shè)立"世界順風(fēng)車日",倡議"鄰里合乘"",建立"順風(fēng)車"網(wǎng)站發(fā)布順乘信息等,推動(dòng)"順風(fēng)車"常態(tài)化。于社會(huì)轉(zhuǎn)型期的中國(guó),好意同乘既突顯了對(duì)節(jié)能減排方面的貢獻(xiàn),又有助于建立、維持或增進(jìn)公民之間的情誼。2017年3月15日通過的《中華人民共和國(guó)民法總則》第8條規(guī)定:"民事主體從事民事活動(dòng),應(yīng)當(dāng)有利于節(jié)約資源,保護(hù)生態(tài)環(huán)境。"將綠色原則作為一項(xiàng)基本原則,再次提醒我們,要對(duì)好意同乘損害賠償責(zé)任加以規(guī)制,鼓勵(lì)環(huán)保行為是法律應(yīng)有之義。盡管在好意同乘相關(guān)問題上的討論越來越多,然而司法實(shí)踐和學(xué)界對(duì)此仍然是爭(zhēng)議大于共識(shí),可謂莫衷一是。好意同乘到底是純粹的生活事實(shí)還是民事法律事實(shí)?理論上對(duì)好意同乘現(xiàn)象是否進(jìn)行抽象性、類型化?好意同乘與無償客運(yùn)合同的關(guān)系是什么?好意人對(duì)同乘人所受損害是否僅限于"適當(dāng)補(bǔ)償"?對(duì)好意人所承擔(dān)損害賠償責(zé)任適當(dāng)減輕的法理根據(jù)何在?這些游走在法律灰色地帶的問題仍懸而未決。本文以強(qiáng)烈的中國(guó)問題為指向,結(jié)合2014年地方法院審理的70件關(guān)于好意同乘糾紛的經(jīng)典案件,借鑒三個(gè)國(guó)家的典型制度,深層面多角度分析。在我國(guó)現(xiàn)有法律制度基礎(chǔ)上,重點(diǎn)闡述其請(qǐng)求權(quán)基礎(chǔ)、歸責(zé)原則、承擔(dān)方式、特殊規(guī)則,探尋對(duì)好意同乘侵權(quán)損害賠償責(zé)任的較完備的處理方案。本文在理論創(chuàng)新方面,試圖填補(bǔ)好意同乘致人損害責(zé)任在我國(guó)的法律空白;在實(shí)際應(yīng)用上,期望能對(duì)我國(guó)在立法、司法等解決機(jī)制上,提供一些有益的參考性意見。研究方法上致力做到:理論命題都是建立在現(xiàn)實(shí)的案例基礎(chǔ)之上,對(duì)理論命題的解說分析都是建立在對(duì)現(xiàn)實(shí)案例的分析基礎(chǔ)上。
[Abstract]:China is in the middle and late stage of industrialization. Due to traffic congestion and automobile environmental pollution, the phenomenon of good-intention ride is becoming more and more common. In some countries, by-take even becomes a normal mode of travel. Kim Jong-hsin, member of the Chinese people's political Consultative Conference in Henan, suggested setting up a "world ride-by-ride day", advocating a "neighborhood ride-in", setting up a "ride-by-ride" website to publish ride-in information, and promoting the regularization of "ride-by-ride". In the transitional period of society, China's good intention to ride together not only highlights its contribution to energy conservation and emission reduction, but also helps to establish it. Article 8 of the General principles of the Civil Code of the people's Republic of China, adopted on March 15, 2017, stipulates: "Civil subjects engaged in civil activities shall be conducive to the conservation of resources and the protection of the ecological environment." Taking the green principle as a basic principle, it reminds us once again that it is necessary to regulate the liability of good intentions and multiply damages, and to encourage environmental protection behavior is the proper meaning of the law. Although there is more and more discussion on the related issues of good intention sharing, however, judicial practice and academic circles still have more controversy than consensus on this issue, it can be said that there is no agreement. Is it a pure fact of life or a fact of civil law? Is the phenomenon of good intention multiplicative abstractness and typology in theory? What is the relationship between good intention and free passenger transport contract? Is the damage suffered by a good person to a fellow occupant limited to "appropriate compensation"? What is the legal basis for the appropriate mitigation of the liability of good intentions for damages? The question of these wandering in the grey areas of the law is still pending. Based on the strong Chinese problem, combined with 70 classic cases in 2014, the paper draws lessons from the typical system of three countries, and makes a deep and multi-angle analysis of this case in the light of the 70 classic cases heard by the local courts in 2014 in the light of the typical system of the three countries. On the basis of the existing legal system of our country, this paper focuses on the basis of the right of claim, the principle of imputation, the way of undertaking, the special rules, and explores a more complete scheme for dealing with the liability of compensation for tort damage with good intention. In the aspect of theoretical innovation, this paper tries to fill the legal blank of the liability for damage caused by good intentions, and in practical application, it is expected to provide some useful reference opinions on the settlement mechanism of legislation and judicature in our country. The theoretical proposition is based on the real case, and the explanation and analysis of the theoretical proposition is based on the analysis of the real case.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：哈爾濱商業(yè)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6條

1 汪性國(guó);;略論“好意同乘”交通事故民事責(zé)任的承擔(dān)[J];法制與社會(huì);2011年30期

2 王長(zhǎng)發(fā);;好意同乘及其債法規(guī)制[J];法治研究;2010年11期

3 張樂;;好意同乘法律責(zé)任研究[J];樂山師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2010年01期

4 吳國(guó)平;;好意同乘的法律性質(zhì)淺析[J];法治研究;2009年09期

5 程嘯;;機(jī)動(dòng)車損害賠償責(zé)任主體研究[J];法學(xué)研究;2006年04期

6 樂科;道路交通事故好意同乘者損害賠償問題探析[J];黑龍江省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年04期

，

本文編號(hào)：2460368