本文選題：食品安全 + 懲罰性損害賠償　； 參考：《華中師范大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：法律責(zé)任制度的完善與否直接關(guān)系到法律制度能否良好地實(shí)施。目前,我國食品安全事故層出不窮,嚴(yán)重地暴露出食品安全領(lǐng)域一系列法律責(zé)任制度具有十分重大的缺陷。在我國現(xiàn)今有關(guān)食品安全領(lǐng)域的各種形式的法律責(zé)任之中,行政法上的法律責(zé)任居于首要性的位置,而私法上的法律責(zé)任和刑事法律中的有關(guān)責(zé)任則處于從屬性的位置。就行政責(zé)任而言,由于取證困難、查處率低、易產(chǎn)生尋租風(fēng)險(xiǎn)、難以有力地激勵(lì)消費(fèi)者索賠等原因,以行政責(zé)任為主導(dǎo)的食品安全責(zé)任制度體系無法很好地?fù)?dān)當(dāng)起維護(hù)我國食品安全的重任。然而,就民事責(zé)任而言,懲罰性損害賠償由于具有補(bǔ)償、懲罰、威懾和激勵(lì)等多重法律功能,能夠有效地提高違法成本和降低消費(fèi)者的維權(quán)成本,實(shí)現(xiàn)對食品安全違法行為的有力規(guī)制,進(jìn)而有效地保護(hù)消費(fèi)者利益和社會公共利益。我國《食品安全法》確立了“十倍”的懲罰性損害賠償制度,但是該制度存在構(gòu)成要件不完善、懲罰力度不足、消費(fèi)者舉證困難、賠償權(quán)利人范圍界定不清、歸責(zé)原則的設(shè)計(jì)不科學(xué)以及民事訴訟程序機(jī)制不完善等弊端,仍舊無法對我國當(dāng)前的食品安全違法行為實(shí)現(xiàn)充分、有力的規(guī)制�？v觀世界,美國、我國臺灣地區(qū)等均建立起了比較完善的食品安全懲罰性損害賠償制度,有力地維護(hù)了本國(地區(qū))的消費(fèi)者利益和社會公共利益。日本和德國等雖然未明確確立懲罰性損害賠償制度在本國的地位,但是均結(jié)合本國國情,建立起一套較為完善的法律責(zé)任制度體系,來實(shí)現(xiàn)對食品安全違法行為的有力規(guī)制。此外,德國和日本等國在司法實(shí)踐和理論上均對懲罰性損害賠償制度給予了越來越高的認(rèn)同與關(guān)注。鑒于此,本文以對食品安全懲罰性損害賠償制度的基本理論進(jìn)行探討為基礎(chǔ),通過對美國、我國臺灣地區(qū)、德國、日本等國家或者地區(qū)的食品安全損害賠償制度進(jìn)行比較分析,并對我國食品安全懲罰性損害賠償制度的立法現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行審視,提出完善我國食品安全懲罰性損害賠償制度的具體建議。 本文除導(dǎo)論和結(jié)語之外,共分為三大部分。 第一部分,對食品安全領(lǐng)域中有關(guān)的懲罰性損害賠償制度的基礎(chǔ)法學(xué)理論予以具體探討。食品安全懲罰性損害賠償制度是一種特殊的損害賠償制度,在法律特征上,崇尚社會本位、重視食品生產(chǎn)經(jīng)營者的主觀惡性、具有多元化的法律功能、適用范圍僅限于食品消費(fèi)領(lǐng)域和高度重視法官的自由裁量權(quán)等。在理論基礎(chǔ)上,食品安全懲罰性損害賠償制度是以社會本位理論和實(shí)質(zhì)正義理論作為自己理論基礎(chǔ)的。在法律功能上,食品安全懲罰性損害賠償制度具有補(bǔ)償、懲罰、威懾和激勵(lì)等多種法律功能。 第二部分,對國際上主要國家或者地區(qū)的食品安全懲罰性損害賠償制度進(jìn)行比較分析。本部分主要對美國、日本、德國和我國臺灣地區(qū)的食品安全懲罰性損害賠償制度進(jìn)行比較分析,并提出對我國食品安全懲罰性損害賠償制度完善的有益借鑒。 第三部分,對我國現(xiàn)行食品安全懲罰性損害賠償制度進(jìn)行立法審視,并在此基礎(chǔ)上提出相關(guān)的法律完善建議。我國現(xiàn)行關(guān)于食品安全的“十倍”懲罰性賠償制度具有構(gòu)成要件不完善、懲罰力度不足、消費(fèi)者舉證困難、賠償權(quán)利人范圍界定不清、歸責(zé)原則的設(shè)計(jì)不科學(xué)以及民事訴訟程序機(jī)制不完善等弊端,無法有力地規(guī)制違反相關(guān)具體法律規(guī)定的行為,也很難有效地保障其他法律主體的合法權(quán)益,促進(jìn)我國良好社會經(jīng)濟(jì)秩序的構(gòu)建。未來我國食品安全懲罰性損害賠償制度應(yīng)當(dāng)建立起一種能夠使法官自由裁量權(quán)得以充分發(fā)揮,以實(shí)際損害額作為賠償數(shù)額的計(jì)算基準(zhǔn),同時(shí)設(shè)置賠償?shù)淖罡呦揞~,并綜合考慮多種因素的賠償數(shù)額計(jì)算模式。同時(shí),未來法律修改應(yīng)當(dāng)在構(gòu)成要件、歸責(zé)原則、賠償權(quán)利人的范圍以及民事訴訟程序機(jī)制等方面對我國現(xiàn)行食品安全懲罰性損害賠償制度進(jìn)行完善。
[Abstract]:Perfect the legal liability system is directly related to the legal system can be well implemented. At present, China's food safety accidents emerge in an endless stream, seriously exposed a series of food safety legal liability system has great defects. In China's current legal liability forms relating to food safety in the field of administrative law, legal liability the key of the position, and the responsibility of the private law liability and criminal law is subordinate position. The administrative responsibility, as evidence of the difficulties, and the low rate, easy to produce a strong incentive to rent-seeking risk, consumer claims and other reasons, the food safety responsibility system in administrative responsibility as the leading are unable to bear the responsibility of the maintenance of food safety in our country. However, civil liability is punished with compensation, punitive damages, Wei Has multiple legal and incentive function, can effectively improve the illegal cost and reduce the cost of rights of consumers, to achieve effective regulation of food safety violations, and effectively protect the interests of consumers and social public interests. China's "food safety law" established a system of punitive damages in ten times, but the system there are elements of not perfect, not enough to punish consumers, the difficulties of proof, the right to compensation scope is not clear, the design is not scientific and the imputation principle of the civil litigation procedure mechanism is imperfect and so on, still not on China's current food safety violations to achieve full, strong regulation. Throughout the world, the United States, China Taiwan area to establish a compensation system for food safety punitive damage relatively perfect, effectively safeguarding the country (region) of the interests of consumers and the public interest. This and Germany, although not explicitly establish the system of punitive damages in their position, but with its own national conditions, to establish a relatively perfect legal liability system, to achieve effective regulation of food safety violations. In addition, countries such as Germany and Japan in the judicial practice and theory of punitive damages system to give recognition and attention more and more. In view of this, based on the basic theory of punitive damage compensation system of food safety were discussed based on the United States and China's Taiwan region, Germany, comparative analysis on the system of compensation for damage to food safety and other countries or regions, and the status of legislation on compensation system the punitive damage to our country's food safety review, put forward specific proposals to improve the system of punitive damages in our country's food safety.
In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this article is divided into three parts.
The first part discusses the basic theory of law, to be on the system of punitive damages in the field of food safety. The system of punitive damages in food safety is a kind of special compensation system, the legal characteristics, advocating social standard, pay attention to food production operators subjective malignant, has the function of Legal Pluralism, applies only to the discretion of food consumption and attaches great importance to the judge. On the basis of the theory, the system of punitive damages in food safety is the social standard theory and justice theory as its theoretical basis. In the legal function, the system of punitive damages in food safety with compensation, punishment, deterrence and incentives and other legal functions.
The second part of the food safety punitive damages of the major countries or regions of the compensation system for comparative analysis. This part of the United States, Japan, comparative analysis of the punitive damage compensation system of food security in Germany and China's Taiwan region, and put forward a useful reference for perfecting the compensation system of punitive damages of food safety in China.
The third part, the legislative review on compensation system of China's current food safety punitive damage, and put forward relevant suggestions. China's current law on food safety "ten times" with elements of punitive compensation system is not perfect, the punishment is not enough, consumers in the difficulties of proof, the right to compensation scope is not clear the design, the imputation principle of civil procedure is not scientific and the mechanism is not perfect and other drawbacks, unable to effectively regulate the violation of the provisions of the relevant specific legal behavior, it is difficult to effectively safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of other legal subjects, promote the construction of good social economic order in our country. The future of the system of punitive damages in food safety in China should be established. A can make the discretion of the judges can give full play to the actual damages as a benchmark for the calculation of the amount of compensation, the compensation set at the same time High limit, and comprehensive calculation model considering the amount of compensation for a variety of factors. At the same time, the future law amendment shall be in the constitution, the principle of imputation, the scope of compensation for human rights and civil procedural mechanism on the compensation system of China's current food safety punitive damage improvement.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D922.16;R155.5

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王利明;美國懲罰性賠償制度研究[J];比較法研究;2003年05期

2 李廣輝;外國懲罰性損害賠償判決的承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行研究[J];比較法研究;2005年02期

3 楊永華;;對我國食品安全法律制度的審視——由“三鹿”奶粉事件引發(fā)的思考[J];長春大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2009年05期

4 李懷;發(fā)達(dá)國家食品安全監(jiān)管體制及其對我國的啟示[J];東北財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2005年01期

5 呂婷婷;;我國食品安全監(jiān)管體制的健全與完善[J];東北農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2011年01期

6 陳治東;聯(lián)邦德國的消費(fèi)者保護(hù)法及消費(fèi)者組織[J];德國研究;1994年02期

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

8 余藝;;懲罰性賠償責(zé)任的成立及其數(shù)額量定——以懲罰性賠償之功能實(shí)現(xiàn)為視角[J];法學(xué)雜志;2008年01期

9 劉文琦;;試論中國大陸與臺灣地區(qū)產(chǎn)品責(zé)任之損害賠償[J];法學(xué)家;1998年02期

10 浦川道太郎;;日本法上的懲罰性損害賠償與制裁性慰謝金[J];法學(xué)家;2001年05期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 對外經(jīng)貿(mào)大學(xué)法學(xué)院 曹永游　北京海拓律師事務(wù)所 張曉寧;[N];檢察日報(bào);2011年

，

本文編號：1743087