【摘要】：2009年我國(guó)頒布的《食品安全法》第96條第2款對(duì)懲罰性賠償制度在食品安全領(lǐng)域的適用做出了規(guī)定,初步確立了“十倍賠償”的原則。這是懲罰性賠償制度在我國(guó)適用的一次重大突破,對(duì)食品生產(chǎn)者和銷售者規(guī)定了更加嚴(yán)格的責(zé)任,希望可以改善我國(guó)食品安全令人擔(dān)憂的現(xiàn)實(shí)狀況。該條款是進(jìn)步性的,具有重大的現(xiàn)實(shí)意義,適合目前我國(guó)國(guó)情和世界經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展形勢(shì),也符合法律制度的發(fā)展趨勢(shì)。我國(guó)食品安全法懲罰性賠償制度與美國(guó)和臺(tái)灣等相關(guān)制度有很多共同之處,但也有很大的差異性。食品安全法第96條第2款不可否認(rèn)是具有一定科學(xué)性和進(jìn)步性的,但也存在很多不合理的地方。本文認(rèn)為在我國(guó)《食品安全法》即將修改之際有必要對(duì)該條款的適用現(xiàn)狀、存在的問(wèn)題等進(jìn)行分析。通過(guò)對(duì)美國(guó)和臺(tái)灣地區(qū)懲罰性賠償相關(guān)法律的比較分析,借鑒其優(yōu)勢(shì)彌補(bǔ)該條款的不足和缺陷,完善其在具體案件中的適用,并提出具體的完善建議,以便發(fā)揮其懲罰犯罪、遏制違法行為的功能,實(shí)現(xiàn)立法者最初的目標(biāo)。 本文共分三章進(jìn)行研究：第一章通過(guò)具體案例介紹我國(guó)食品安全責(zé)任中懲罰性賠償適用的現(xiàn)狀和問(wèn)題。懲罰性賠償?shù)倪m用有其特殊的構(gòu)成要件,包括在主體要件、主觀方面過(guò)錯(cuò)、違法行為、損害結(jié)果,以及違法行為和損害結(jié)果之間的因果關(guān)系。雖然我國(guó)食品安全法中已經(jīng)確立了懲罰性賠償償制度,但由于目前該制度還不是很完善,在司法實(shí)踐中存在著適用方面的障礙,因此,并沒(méi)有發(fā)揮其應(yīng)有的作用。第二章分析國(guó)外產(chǎn)品侵權(quán)領(lǐng)域如何適用懲罰性賠償制度并提供一些借鑒。主要通過(guò)分析美國(guó)和我國(guó)臺(tái)灣地區(qū)懲罰性賠的特征并和我國(guó)懲罰性賠償進(jìn)行比較,最后得出一些啟示。第三章,提出完善懲罰性賠償制度的建議。例如,將銷售者的“重大過(guò)失”行為和“知假買假”行為納入該制度的調(diào)整范圍；改變現(xiàn)有的賠償金計(jì)算標(biāo)準(zhǔn),確立與實(shí)際損失相結(jié)合的彈性計(jì)算標(biāo)準(zhǔn)；完善相關(guān)訴訟制度等。
[Abstract]:Article 96 (2) of the Food Safety Law promulgated in 2009 provides for the application of punitive damages in the field of food safety, and establishes the principle of "ten times compensation". This is a major breakthrough in the application of the punitive damages system in our country, which stipulates more strict liability for food producers and sellers, hoping to improve the worrying reality of food safety in China. This clause is progressive and has great practical significance. It is suitable for the current situation of our country and the development of the world economy, and is also in line with the development trend of the legal system. The punitive damages system of food safety law in China has much in common with other related systems, such as the United States and Taiwan, but there are also great differences. Article 96, paragraph 2, of the Food Safety Law is undeniably scientific and progressive, but there are many unreasonable points. This paper holds that it is necessary to analyze the present situation and existing problems of the application of the food safety law in China when it is about to be amended. Based on the comparative analysis of the relevant laws of punitive damages in the United States and Taiwan, the author makes use of its advantages to make up for the deficiencies and defects of this provision, consummates its application in specific cases, and puts forward specific suggestions to punish the crime. Restrain the function of illegal behavior, realize legislator's initial goal. This paper is divided into three chapters: the first chapter introduces the application of punitive damages in food safety liability through specific cases. The application of punitive damages has its special constitutive elements, including the subjective fault, the illegal behavior, the damage result, and the causality between the illegal act and the damage result. Although the system of punitive damages has been established in the food safety law of our country, because the system is not perfect at present, there are some obstacles in the judicial practice, so it does not play its due role. The second chapter analyzes how to apply the punitive damages system in the field of foreign product tort and provides some reference. By analyzing the characteristics of punitive damages in the United States and Taiwan and comparing them with punitive damages in China, some revelations are obtained. The third chapter, puts forward the suggestion to perfect the punitive damages system. For example, the "gross negligence" behavior and the "knowing fake purchase" behavior of the seller should be included in the adjustment scope of the system; the existing standard of compensation calculation should be changed, and the flexible calculation standard combined with the actual loss should be established; and the relevant litigation system should be perfected.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D922.16

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 王利明;美國(guó)懲罰性賠償制度研究[J];比較法研究;2003年05期

2 董春華;;美國(guó)產(chǎn)品責(zé)任法中的懲罰性賠償[J];比較法研究;2008年06期

3 張莉;;論侵權(quán)責(zé)任法的懲罰性賠償制度的適用[J];東南學(xué)術(shù);2011年01期

4 李響;;我國(guó)食品安全法“十倍賠償”規(guī)定之批判與完善[J];法商研究;2009年06期

5 王勇;;論我國(guó)懲罰性賠償制度的發(fā)展與完善[J];廣西政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年06期

6 李巖;;《食品安全法》“十倍賠償”制度的法理分析與現(xiàn)實(shí)考察[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)研究導(dǎo)刊;2010年29期

，

本文編號(hào)：2415880