寵物受侵害時飼主損害賠償之研究

Abstract

近年來，被飼養的寵物數量增加，寵物的重要性也上升了。據農委會（現農業部）資料顯示，2021年新增登記之貓、狗已達22.9萬隻，超越了該年的新生兒增加人數。在此前提下，究竟寵物受到侵害而受傷或死亡時，飼主能為何請求，便是一個值得研究的課題。本文討論了寵物受侵害而受傷或死亡時，飼主所得為之財產上與非財產上損害賠償請求。在財產上損害賠償請求方面，本文分析了飼主之損害賠償請求權範圍，肯定了飼主得在寵物受傷時請求醫藥費，並在死亡時請求所支出之醫藥費與一定範圍內之殯葬費，除此之外，亦討論了寵物為明星下飼主可能請求之所失利益；在非財產上損害賠償請求方面，本文討論了可能成立之請求權基礎與對此否定之見解，在其中，又以健康權受侵害成立之前提下，輔以外國法之「驚嚇損害」概念，研究了以健康權受侵害作為請求權基礎之可能的責任成立要件。最後，本文認為，在非財產上損害賠償請求方面，若要使飼主得為請求，修法仍為較佳方式，但在此同時必須將民法第194條、195條第3項所規定之身分關係要件放寬。

In recent years, the number of pets has increased, and so has the importance of pets. According to the statistics from the Council of Agriculture (now Ministry of Agriculture), the number of newly registered cats and dogs in 2021 reached 229,000, surpassing the number of newborns of the same year. Under these premises, pet owners’ claims regarding compensation for injured and killed pets is a subject worth researching. This thesis discusses pet owners’ property and non-property claims for compensation when their pets are injured or killed. With regards to property claims for compensation, this thesis analyzes the scope of pet owners’ claims for compensation and acknowledges that owners may claim for medical expenses when pets are injured and for both medical expenses and a certain amount of funeral costs if the pets are killed. In addition, this thesis also considers the potential losses owners may claim for in the case of famous pets. With regards to non-property claims for compensation, this thesis investigates the possible causes of actions and views that argue against them. In between, by referencing comparative law and taking into accounts the concept of “Schockshaden”, “sudden schock” and “emotional distress”, this thesis studies the possible requirements for establishing the cause of action on the premise that the right of health is injured. Finally, this thesis argues that amending the law is the more suited option to allow pet owners’ to claim for non-property compensation. However, at the same time, the status restriction in Article 194 and Section 3 of Article 195 of the Civil Law must also be loosened.