【摘要】：現(xiàn)代社會(huì)是一個(gè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)頻發(fā)的社會(huì),對(duì)于法益侵害的緩解與分配成為現(xiàn)階段制度構(gòu)建不可忽視的問(wèn)題。隨著人權(quán)保障的進(jìn)一步深入,社會(huì)模式的構(gòu)建,由公權(quán)力至上逐步向個(gè)人權(quán)益的保障轉(zhuǎn)變。在制度構(gòu)建上,不再設(shè)置以損害賠償為立足點(diǎn),而更傾向于關(guān)注行為主體價(jià)值標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的設(shè)置,損害責(zé)任承擔(dān)的判定,進(jìn)而以具有法律約束力的方式減少侵害的發(fā)生或?yàn)橐寻l(fā)生的損害提供救濟(jì)。然而,在司法實(shí)踐過(guò)程中,交通事故侵權(quán)責(zé)任的設(shè)置存在諸多立法缺陷,致使交通事故發(fā)生后,受害人無(wú)法依據(jù)現(xiàn)行機(jī)制,獲得全面充分的補(bǔ)償,而與之相對(duì)應(yīng)的損害賠償機(jī)制不甚完善。故而,在交通事故頻發(fā)的當(dāng)下,如何貫徹落實(shí)各行為主體責(zé)任的承擔(dān),確保受害人在事故發(fā)生后得到全面的救助與補(bǔ)償,成為目前亟需解決的問(wèn)題。貨車司機(jī)陳某在嚴(yán)重超載通過(guò)收費(fèi)站時(shí),收費(fèi)站明知陳某超載仍予以放行,未履行對(duì)其管轄區(qū)域的安全保障義務(wù),放任陳某的危險(xiǎn)行為,致使陳某發(fā)生交通事故的可能性及事故后產(chǎn)生的危險(xiǎn)程度均增加,最終導(dǎo)致交通事故的發(fā)生。在案件審理過(guò)程中,各方主體對(duì)收費(fèi)站的放任超載行為與交通事故發(fā)生是否存在因果關(guān)系,收費(fèi)站應(yīng)否對(duì)該行為承擔(dān)法律責(zé)任產(chǎn)生了較大分歧。對(duì)于收費(fèi)站是否全面履行其職責(zé),收費(fèi)站的行為與損害結(jié)果之間是否存在因果關(guān)系,成為此類案件爭(zhēng)議的焦點(diǎn)。故而,對(duì)于這一系列爭(zhēng)議的解決,相關(guān)制度的構(gòu)建和完善是極為重要的。立足司法實(shí)踐,收費(fèi)站作為其管轄區(qū)域的安全保障義務(wù)人,在未全面履行職責(zé)致使相對(duì)人所處環(huán)境危險(xiǎn)程度增加,最終導(dǎo)致法益侵害的歸責(zé),目前對(duì)該類歸責(zé)機(jī)制的設(shè)置尚待完善。綜合考慮各行為主體的責(zé)任承擔(dān),這不僅能為現(xiàn)階段交通事故頻發(fā),受害人難以得到全面補(bǔ)償提供全面的救濟(jì)途徑,亦是人權(quán)保障在司法過(guò)程中的體現(xiàn),符合人權(quán)保障的立法思想。因此,設(shè)置交通事故全面的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)承擔(dān)體系,不僅能有效保障當(dāng)事人的合法權(quán)益,更是完善現(xiàn)階段立法、實(shí)現(xiàn)制度設(shè)置目的、人權(quán)保障理念制度化落實(shí)的關(guān)鍵。
[Abstract]:Modern society is a society with frequent risks, the mitigation and distribution of legal interest infringement become a problem that can not be ignored in the present system construction. With the further development of human rights protection and the construction of social model, the protection of individual rights and interests is gradually transformed from the supreme of public power to the protection of individual rights and interests. In the system construction, we should pay more attention to the setting of the value standard of the behavior subject and the judgment of the damage liability instead of taking the damage compensation as the foothold. In order to reduce the occurrence of infringement or to provide relief for the damage that has occurred in a legally binding manner. However, in the course of judicial practice, there are many legislative defects in the establishment of tort liability for traffic accidents, which leads to the victims being unable to obtain comprehensive and adequate compensation according to the existing mechanism. The corresponding damage compensation mechanism is not perfect. Therefore, at present, how to carry out the responsibility of the main actors and ensure the victims to get comprehensive relief and compensation after the accident has become a problem that needs to be solved. When the truck driver Chen passed through the toll point with serious overloading, the toll station, knowing that Chen was still overloaded, had not fulfilled his obligation to safeguard the area under his jurisdiction and allowed Chen to act in danger. It causes the possibility of traffic accident and the degree of danger after the accident to increase, which eventually leads to the occurrence of traffic accident. In the course of the trial of the case, whether there is a causal relationship between the overloading of the toll station and the traffic accident, and whether the toll station should bear the legal responsibility for the act has great differences. Whether the toll station fully performs its duties, whether there is a causal relationship between the behavior of the toll station and the result of damage has become the focus of controversy in this kind of cases. Therefore, for the settlement of this series of disputes, the construction and improvement of relevant systems is extremely important. Based on judicial practice, the toll station, as the obligor of safety and security in the area under its jurisdiction, does not fully perform its duties, which results in an increase in the degree of environmental danger to the relative person, and finally results in the imputation of legal interest infringement. At present, the establishment of this kind of imputation mechanism needs to be perfected. Considering comprehensively the responsibility of various actors, this can not only provide a comprehensive remedy for the frequent traffic accidents and the difficulty for the victims to obtain comprehensive compensation, but also reflect the protection of human rights in the judicial process. Legislative ideas consistent with human rights protection. Therefore, setting up a comprehensive risk bearing system of traffic accidents can not only effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties, but also improve the current legislation, achieve the purpose of system setting, and the key to institutionalize the concept of human rights protection.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D921

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 肖揚(yáng)宇;;定罪因果關(guān)系及認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的建構(gòu)——從兩個(gè)案例切入[J];華北水利水電學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社科版);2012年01期

2 權(quán)新廣;;試談刑法中的因果關(guān)系[J];法學(xué)研究;1963年03期

3 夏起經(jīng);;刑法中的因果關(guān)系[J];法學(xué)研究;1981年02期

4 梅o，

本文編號(hào)：2233016