請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/16064
標題: | 論商品警告瑕疵:歸責原理及妥適性的判斷 Warning Defect: Principles and Adequacy |
作者: | Kai-Shen Huang 黃凱紳 |
指導教授: | 陳忠五 |
關鍵字: | 商品警告義務,商品警告瑕疵,無過失責任原則,無過失嚴格責任,無過失危險責任,過失責任原則,妥適性, duty to warn,warning defect,no-fault liability,strict liability,risk liability,negligence,adequacy, |
出版年 : | 2012 |
學位: | 碩士 |
摘要: | 自從民國83 年制定推出《消費者保護法》之後,一時之間,商品責任法成
為我國理論及實務的熱門焦點。其中,不論是比較法或臺灣本土的討論,「商品 責任法的歸責原理及歸責標準」一直是重要且難解的議題。其歸責原理究竟是「純粹的無過失嚴格責任」、「混雜無過失嚴格責任及過失責任」或是「向來的過失責任」,抽象理論及具體構成要件的層面間,存在著一定程度的矛盾現象。除此之外,商品瑕疵的認定,究竟是透過「單一的瑕疵」或「複數的瑕疵」概念處理, 同樣是一個值得探討的爭議。循此問題意識,筆者於論文所聚焦的焦點是商品責 任法的「商品警告義務」或「商品警告瑕疵」,分別透過該義務「歸責原理的探 討」及「具體構成要件的建構」此二大支柱,嘗試論證其「歸責原理」及「具體 構成要件的內涵」。此論文提出的重要結論是:無過失歸責原理,不論是「英美 法的無過失嚴格責任」或「我國法向來的無過失危險責任」,其逾越「預見可能 性」的責任界限,並不是一個適當援以為商品警告義務的理論基礎;反之,向來 過失歸責原理所揭櫫的「預見可能性」概念,才是一個使商品警告義務的建構具 備可行性的理論依據。商品警告義務的具體構成要件,必須建立於警告的妥適性 判斷,而此妥適性又能區分為「程序妥適性」及「實體妥適性」。前者涉及的子 議題包括:「能預見的危險」、「重要的危險」、「資訊的正確性」、「誠懇的標示」、「資訊的一致性」及「充分的警告內容」;後者,則涉及「顯著性」、「語言使用的要求」、「非文字的警告型態」及「安全性擔保的禁止」。 Product liability is one of the subjects that attract me during school. It has been a popular and controversial issue around the world for many decades. Amongst this system, the most challenging and controversial issues, in my opinion, are its basic theory and standards to decide what a defect of product is. Many scholars of Taiwan have indicated that the product liability belongs to the family of no-fault liability, which is a liability that consumers are able to sue without proving negligence. By the influence from different legal systems, this liability can be divided into two ways to be interpreted: the first one is the term of strict liability; the second one is the notion of risk liability. Apart from the issue of basic theory, to define a defect of product is also a prominent obstacle on the path to outline a precise content of product liability. My core topics here are to examine the application of those two liabilities based on the no-fault liability and to construct a substantial standard for warning defect of manufacturers of products. In this dissertation, I indicate that warning defect is not able to be properly based on the no-fault liability, including the strict liability and risk liability. The optimal option is still the negligence, which embraces the notions of foreseeablity and of reasonableness. It provides a relatively feasible mechanism to build a standard of what a warning defect of products is. Based on the preliminary conclusions above, I select the concept of adequacy as a central idea to develop factors to assess the duty to warn of manufacturers of products. |
URI: | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/16064 |
全文授權: | 未授權 |
顯示於系所單位: | 法律學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-101-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 4.4 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。