:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:或重於泰山、或輕於鴻毛--地方法院車禍致死案件慰撫金之實證研究
書刊名:政大法學評論
作者:張永健 引用關係何漢葳李宗憲
作者(外文):Chang, Yun-chienHo, Han-weiLi, Tsung-hsien
出版日期:2017
卷期:149
頁次:頁139-219
主題關鍵詞:生命慰撫金收入年齡破產親屬關係調整補充機能固定效果隨機效果結構方程模型Loss of consortiumPain and suffering damagesIncomeAgeBankruptcyFamilial relationshipAdjustment functionFixed effectRandom effectStructural equation model
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(7) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:5
  • 共同引用共同引用:123
  • 點閱點閱:28
民法第一九四條之死亡慰撫金,法院尚未發展出明確之酌定規 則。實際上法院酌定之金額,是逼近同案同判,還是近乎隨機,過 去的文獻尚未提出明確分析。將二○○八年至二○一二年地方法院 車禍致死案件用在線性混合效果模型與結構方程模型,本文探究法 院判給個別原告與全體原告之慰撫金數額,是否有跡可尋,並檢驗 學說與作者自行提出之規範主張與實然猜測。統計分析結果發現: 原告與被害人的親屬關係,與慰撫金數額高度相關。但從不同角度 觀察,會得出配偶或受扶養父母或未成年子女獲得最高額慰撫金之 不同結論。當被告必須自掏腰包支付原告之財產上損害時,其負擔 越重,慰撫金數額越低。最高法院所明示下級法院應該考量之點, 反而沒有明顯影響慰撫金之酌定數額。
Assessing pain and suffering damages in wrongful death cases is discretionary and in some ways mysterious. The Taiwan Supreme Court has laid out the necessary factors to be taken into account by lower courts such as plaintiffs’ and defendants’ incomes and education levels. It is doubtful, however, whether and to what extent these factors affect the decisions by the district courts in Taiwan. Using a novel data set, this article presents the first large-scale, sophisticated empirical study of pain and suffering damages in wrongful death cases in Taiwan. The findings are that the factors emphasized by the Taiwan Supreme Court had no effect. In addition, familial relations mattered greatly, while age and attorney representation had no clear effects. Moreover, judges used their discretion in assessing pain and suffering damages to adjust the awards to compensate for the victims’ other losses. Finally, we find evidence in support of the conjecture that courts would take into account the possibility that high pain and suffering damage may bankrupt defendants.
期刊論文
1.黃國昌(20090200)。我國勞動訴訟之實證研究--以第一審訴訟之審理與終結情形為中心。政大法學評論,107,165-228。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.張永健(20130500)。袋地通行權判決之實證研究。月旦法學,216,211-227。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Huang, Kuo-Chang(2009)。Does Discovery Promote Settlement? An Empirical Answer。Journal of Empirical Legal Studies,6(2),241-278。  new window
4.Huang, Kuo-Chang、Chen, Kong-Pin、Lin, Chang-Ching(2010)。Does the Type of Criminal Defense Counsel Affect Case Outcomes?: A Natural Experiment in Taiwan。International Review of Law and Economics,30(2),113-127。  new window
5.張永健(20140300)。越界建築訴訟之實證研究。中研院法學期刊,14,319-373。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.黃國昌(20070900)。律師代理對民事訴訟結果之影響--理論分析與實證研究間之激盪。中研院法學期刊,1,45-104。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.王鵬翔、張永健(20150900)。經驗面向的規範意義--論實證研究在法學中的角色。中研院法學期刊,17,205-294。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.黃國昌(20081200)。我國勞動訴訟之實證研究--以第一審訴訟之審理與終結情形為中心。政大法學評論,106,203-247。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.張永健(20000300)。人身保險有無複保險之適用。保險專刊,59,143-186。new window  延伸查詢new window
10.Chen, Kong-pin、Huang, Kuo-chang、Lin, Chang-ching(2015)。Party capability versus court preference: Why do the "Haves" come out ahead?--An empirical lesson from the Taiwan supreme court。The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization,31(1),93-126。  new window
11.何漢葳、張永健(20161200)。法實證研究方法進階導論--固定效果、隨機效果、群聚標準誤。月旦法學,259,167-181。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.張永健、陳恭平、林常青(2017)。定錨效應與司法判決--實證研究的改革啟示。北大法律和金融評論,2017(3)。  延伸查詢new window
13.張永健、李宗憲(20151200)。身體健康侵害慰撫金之實證研究:2008年至2012年地方法院醫療糾紛與車禍案件。國立臺灣大學法學論叢,44(4),1785-1843。new window  延伸查詢new window
14.吳俊穎、楊增暐、賴惠蓁、陳榮基(20120600)。醫療糾紛民事訴訟的損害賠償--法界學說、實務見解及實證研究。法學新論,36,13-51。new window  延伸查詢new window
15.張永健、陳恭平、劉育昇(20160300)。無權占有他人土地與相當於租金之不當得利--實證研究與政策建議。政大法學評論,144,81-153。new window  延伸查詢new window
16.詹森林(20101000)。非財產上損害與懲罰性賠償金。月旦裁判時報,5,32-39。  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.陳忠五(2012)。慰撫金酌定標準之研究--以侵害身體健康法益事件類型為中心。慰撫金酌定研討會,398-454。  延伸查詢new window
2.詹森林(2012)。侵害生命權事件慰撫金酌定標準之研究。慰撫金酌定研討會,54-120。  延伸查詢new window
3.鄭傑夫(2012)。慰撫金酌定之標準--以生命權為中心。慰撫金酌定研討會,121-286。  延伸查詢new window
4.Chang, Yun-Chien、Chen, Kong-Pin、Lin, Chang-Ching(2015)。Attorney and Judge Experience in Torts Litigation: An Empirical Study。2015 Conference on Empirical Legal Studies。  new window
學位論文
1.陳瑩(2009)。民事損害賠償法上慰撫金數額算定標準之研究(碩士論文)。國立成功大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.藍家偉(2009)。慰撫金量定之理論與實務(碩士論文)。國立臺灣大學。  延伸查詢new window
3.戴廷哲(2014)。論責任保險對侵權行為法之影響(碩士論文)。國立臺灣大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.陳聰富(20080000)。侵權違法性與損害賠償。臺北:元照出版社。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.王澤鑑(2012)。人格權法--法釋義學、比較法、案例研究。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Hsu, Jason C.(1996)。MULTIPLE COMPARISONS: THEORY AND METHODS。London:Chapman & Hall。  new window
4.Ramseyer, J. Mark(2015)。Second-Best Justice: The Virtues of Japanese Private Law。Chicago, IL:The University of Chicago Press。  new window
5.Shapo, Marshall(2010)。PRINCIPLES OF TORT LAW。New York, NY:West。  new window
6.Wasserman, Larry A.(2005)。ALL OF NONPARAMETRIC STATISTICS。New York, NY:Springer。  new window
7.Epstein, Richard A.(1999)。Torts。Aspen。  new window
8.陳順宇(2005)。多變量分析。華泰文化事業股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
其他
1.張永健(20170300)。社會科學式的比較法研究--評Mark Ramseyer. 2015. Second Best Justice: The Virtues of Japanese Private Law. The University of Chicago Press。new window  new window
圖書論文
1.王澤鑑(1979)。慰撫金。民法學說與判例研究。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.張永健(2013)。共有物分割判決之實證研究。2011司法制度實證研究。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
QR Code
QRCODE