本文選題：快遞 + 損害賠償��； 參考：《西北大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：截至2014年10月20日,我國快遞業(yè)務(wù)量突破100億件�？爝f業(yè)務(wù)的發(fā)展一方面給消費者生活帶來便利,另一方面侵害消費者權(quán)益的現(xiàn)象亦屢見不鮮。消費者在自身利益受到損害時,難以獲得賠償?shù)膯栴}已成為社會關(guān)注的焦點之一。為解決消費者賠償難的問題,文章在總結(jié)、分析前人研究的基礎(chǔ)上,通過對大量案例的分析、與快遞企業(yè)相關(guān)人員進(jìn)行訪談等方式,對快遞民事?lián)p害賠償法律關(guān)系進(jìn)行梳理,具體針對快遞損害賠償?shù)暮x、損害賠償當(dāng)事人的確定及歸責(zé)原則、損害賠償中的保價和最高限額賠償?shù)葐栴}進(jìn)行研究。文章除緒論外分為三個部分,第一部分闡述了快遞民事?lián)p害賠償?shù)暮x及性質(zhì),通過分析何為快遞、快遞民事?lián)p害賠償產(chǎn)生的原因以及損害賠償?shù)南嚓P(guān)理論,筆者將快遞民事?lián)p害賠償定義為快遞企業(yè)在提供快遞服務(wù)的過程中,因快件延誤、快件丟失、快件損毀等原因,對消費者或者他人造成損失,依照規(guī)定應(yīng)當(dāng)承擔(dān)的損害賠償責(zé)任；快遞民事?lián)p害賠償性質(zhì)上屬于侵權(quán)責(zé)任和違約責(zé)任的競合,消費者在主張損害賠償責(zé)任時,可以選擇請求權(quán)以使自己的損失得到最大補償。第二部分明確了損害賠償?shù)漠?dāng)事人和歸責(zé)原則。損害賠償權(quán)利人和損害賠償義務(wù)人會因主張侵權(quán)損害賠償責(zé)任或是違約損害賠償責(zé)任的不同而有所不同,為了保護(hù)受害人的利益,建議對侵權(quán)性快遞民事?lián)p害賠償?shù)臍w責(zé)原則適用過錯推定。第三部分針對備受爭議的快遞服務(wù)中的保價及最高額賠償?shù)葐栴},筆者認(rèn)為當(dāng)快遞企業(yè)盡到合理提醒的義務(wù)時,保價條款是有效的；快件在運輸途中,本身具有一定的風(fēng)險,要求快遞企業(yè)收取低郵費的同時承擔(dān)高風(fēng)險,這是不公平的,快遞企業(yè)的最高限額賠償是合理的,但是不能否認(rèn)目前快遞企業(yè)的賠償標(biāo)準(zhǔn)偏低,具體可參考我國交通運輸及物流行業(yè)中規(guī)定的賠償標(biāo)準(zhǔn),確定法定的而非約定的合理的最高限額賠償標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。
[Abstract]:As of October 20, 2014, China's express delivery volume exceeded 10 billion pieces.On the one hand, the development of express service brings convenience to consumers, on the other hand, the phenomenon of infringing on consumers' rights and interests is common.The problem that consumers are hard to get compensation when their own interests are damaged has become one of the focus of attention.In order to solve the problem of consumer compensation, based on the summary and analysis of previous studies, through the analysis of a large number of cases and interviews with related personnel of express delivery enterprises, the article combs the legal relationship of civil damage compensation in express delivery.This paper studies the meaning of the damage compensation by express delivery, the determination and imputation principle of the parties to the damage compensation, the insured price and the maximum compensation in the damage compensation, and so on.In addition to the introduction, the article is divided into three parts. The first part expounds the meaning and nature of civil damages by express delivery, through the analysis of what express delivery, the causes of civil damages and the related theory of damages.In the process of providing express service, the author defines the civil damages of express delivery as causing losses to consumers or others due to the delay of express delivery, loss of express, damage to express mail, etc.According to the provisions of damage compensation liability; express civil damage compensation nature belongs to tort liability and breach of contract liability competing consumers can choose to claim the right of claim in order to make their own losses maximum compensation.The second part clarifies the parties and the principle of imputation of damages.In order to protect the interests of the victims, the obligee and the obligor of compensation for damages may be different from each other because they claim the liability for tort damages or damages for breach of contract.It is suggested to apply the presumption of fault to the imputation principle of tort express civil damages.In the third part, aiming at the question of price insurance and maximum compensation in the disputed express delivery service, the author thinks that when express delivery enterprises fulfill their obligation to remind them reasonably, the price insurance clause is effective; the express shipment itself has certain risks in transit.It is unfair to require express delivery enterprises to charge low postage charges and bear high risks at the same time. The maximum compensation for express delivery enterprises is reasonable, but it cannot be denied that at present the standard of compensation for express delivery enterprises is on the low side.Referring to the compensation standard stipulated in the transportation and logistics industry of our country, we can determine the legal and not the agreed reasonable maximum compensation standard.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西北大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D923;D922.296

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王利明;;侵權(quán)責(zé)任法的中國特色[J];法學(xué)家;2010年02期

2 王利明;民事證據(jù)規(guī)則司法解釋若干問題研究[J];法學(xué);2004年01期

3 孫曉琳;;快遞保價運輸若干法律問題探析[J];法制與社會;2009年15期

4 何曦;;從消費者權(quán)益保護(hù)的角度看格式條款[J];法制與社會;2009年26期

5 胡明;符敬青;;議快遞業(yè)中的保價條款[J];法制與社會;2011年29期

6 王利明;;論第三人利益合同[J];法制現(xiàn)代化研究;2002年00期

7 高翼飛;;快遞保價條款在為誰“保駕”[J];法庭內(nèi)外;2012年08期

8 落志仙;;快遞服務(wù)合同的性質(zhì)探析[J];法制博覽(中旬刊);2014年02期

9 陳海英;;快遞服務(wù)糾紛審判實務(wù)探析[J];江南社會學(xué)院學(xué)報;2013年04期

10 陳海燕;常連玉;;國外快遞業(yè)發(fā)展對我國民營快遞業(yè)的啟示[J];交通企業(yè)管理;2013年07期

，

本文編號：1746149