:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:建物瑕疵之侵權責任--商品自傷的損害賠償
書刊名:政大法學評論
作者:陳聰富 引用關係
作者(外文):Chen, Tsung-fu
出版日期:2015
卷期:143
頁次:頁61-122
主題關鍵詞:商品自傷商品責任商品瑕疵建物瑕疵純粹經濟上損失嚴格責任侵權責任損害賠償Commodity injuryPure economic lossTort lawProduct liabilityBuilding defectsConsequential lossConsumer protection law
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(5) 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:4
  • 共同引用共同引用:60
  • 點閱點閱:12
本文以商品自傷案件所生的侵權責任作為討論主題。關於建築物瑕疵所生的侵權責任,最高法院認為加害人應依民法第184條第2項規定,負損害賠償責任,高等法院更認為,被害人得依消保法第7條之規定,請求建物出售者負損害賠償責任。 本文指出,各國產品責任法採取嚴格責任,其保護對象限於人身或其他財產受害,商品自傷之損害,並非產品責任法保護之客體。關於動產之商品自傷案件,既非消保法關於產品責任之保護範圍,亦非民法侵權責任保護之對象。而不動產瑕疵所生之損害,固非消保法嚴格責任之保護範圍,但基於保護房屋所有人之權利,房屋建造人應依民法侵權責任之規定負賠償責任。至於瑕疵房屋之所有人之請求權基礎,最高法院以民法第184條第2項為依據,本文則認為應以民法第184條第1項後段規定作為被害人之請求權基礎。
The Taiwan Supreme Court holds that the injured party is entitled to claim damages for losses suffered due to a defective building that results in the decrease in value of the building under Article 184 (2) of the Taiwan Civil Code. The high court further declares that the injured party is allowed to claim damages for the defective building based on Article 7 of the Taiwan Consumer Protection Act. These decisions are concerned with the intriguing issue of tort liability for the commodity injury. This paper undertakes a comparative study on the product liability and tort liability on the commodity injury, including US, UK, Germany and Canada laws. Comparative law indicates that the buyer of a product is not allowed to claim damages due to the defect of the products under the consumer protection act. Nonetheless, it is controversial as to whether a buyer of a defective building is entitled to claim compensa-tion on the ground of the tort liability. It is submitted in this paper that the buyer should be allowed to claim damages for defective buildings under tort liability, especially in the event the buildings are destroyed in an earthquake. The ground for the injured party to make such a claim is based not on Article 184 (2) but on the second sentence of Article 184 (1) of the Taiwan Civil Code.
期刊論文
1.詹森林(2000)。債法修法實施十週年研討會發言記錄。台灣法學雜誌,134。  延伸查詢new window
2.詹森林(20120100)。臺灣民事財產法若干重要實務發展之回顧--承攬之物之瑕疵擔保與不完全給付、給付不當得利無法律上原因之舉證責任、消費性定型化契約之審閱期間及過失所致純粹經濟損失之侵權責任。月旦法學,200,245-266。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Beever, Allan(2004)。A Rights-Based Approach to the Recovery of Economic Loss in Negligence。OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMONWEALTH L. J.,4。  new window
4.Quill, Eoin(2006)。Consumer Protection in Respect of Defective Buildings。Tort L. Rev.,14。  new window
5.Thompson, Patricia H.、Dean, Christine(2005)。Continued, Erosion of the Economic Loss Rule in Construction Litigation by and Against Owners。The CONSTRUCTION Lawyer,25。  new window
6.陳忠五(20090815)。論消費者保護法商品責任的保護法益範圍。臺灣法學雜誌,134,77-96。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.姚志明(2002)。侵權行為法研究。元照。  延伸查詢new window
2.鄭玉波(1983)。民法債編總論。  延伸查詢new window
3.邱聰智(2000)。新訂民法債編通則。輔仁大學法學院法律服務中心。  延伸查詢new window
4.楊佳元(2009)。侵權行為損害賠償責任。  延伸查詢new window
5.郭麗珍(1999)。瑕疵損害、瑕疵結果損害與繼續侵蝕性損害。  延伸查詢new window
6.曾隆興(20030000)。詳解損害賠償法。臺北:三民書局。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.黃立(2006)。民法債編總論。  延伸查詢new window
8.梅仲協(1954)。民法要義。  延伸查詢new window
9.王澤鑑(2010)。侵權行為法。  延伸查詢new window
10.劉春堂(2010)。判解民法債編總論。  延伸查詢new window
11.Geistfeld, Mark A.(2006)。Principles OF Products Liability。New York:Foundation Press。  new window
12.Doutsch, Erwin、Ahrens, Hans-Jtirgen、普川道太郎(2008)。ドィッ不法行為法。  延伸查詢new window
13.American Law Institute(1998)。Restatement Third, Torts: Products Liability。Washington, D.C.:American Law Institute。  new window
14.Dugdale, Anthony M.(2000)。Clerk & Lindsell on Torts。London:Sweet & Maxwell。  new window
15.Owen, David、Madden, Stuart、Davis, Mary(2000)。MADDEN & OWEN ON Products Liability。Minnesota:West Group。  new window
16.Markensinis, Basil、Unberath, Hannes(2002)。The German Law of Torts: A Comparative Treaties。Oxford:Oxford University Press。  new window
17.Larenz, Karl、Canaris, Claus-Wilhelm(1994)。Shuldrecht。  new window
18.von Bar, Christian(2009)。Principles of European Law, Non-Contractual Liability Arising out of Damage Caused to Another。Oxford:Oxford University Press。  new window
19.史尚寬(1983)。債法總論。  延伸查詢new window
20.林誠二(2010)。債法總論新解:體系化解說。瑞興圖書股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
21.孫森焱(2012)。民法債編總論。  延伸查詢new window
22.朱柏松(1998)。消費者保護法論。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.詹森林(2006)。消保法商品責任之消費者與第三人。民事法理與判決研究。  延伸查詢new window
2.王澤鑑(1993)。挖斷電纜的民事責任:經濟上損失的賠償。民法學說與判例研究。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.陳自強(2011)。民法侵權行為法體系之再構成--民法第191條之3之體系地位。台灣民法與日本債權法之現代化。  延伸查詢new window
4.陳聰富(2008)。論侵權行為法之違法性概念。侵權違法性與損害賠償。元照出版有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
5.Partlett, David(2007)。Defective Structures and Economic Loss in the United States: Law and Policy。Emerging Issues in Tort Law。Oxford:Hart Publishing。  new window
6.(2002)。Medicus, von Dieter。Schuldrecht, Besonderer Teil。  new window
7.Witting, Christian(2004)。Compensation for Pure Economic Loss from a Common Lawyer's Perspective。Pure Economic Loss。New York:Springer。  new window
8.Todd, Stephen(2007)。Policy Issues in Defective Property Cases。Emerging Issues in Tort Law。Oxford:Hart Publishing。  new window
9.邱聰智(1996)。商品責任釋義--以消費者保護法爲中心。當代法學名家論文集:慶祝法學叢刊創刊四十週年。法學叢刊雜誌社。  延伸查詢new window
10.王澤鑑(1996)。商品製造者責任與純粹經濟上損失。民法學說與判例研究。臺北:王澤鑑。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.詹森林(2003)。消保法有關商品責任之規定在實務上之適用與評析。民事法理與判決研究(三)消費者保護法專論。臺北:元照。  延伸查詢new window
12.陳聰富(20110000)。論侵權行為法上之過失概念--最高法院90年度臺上字第1682號民事判決評釋。侵權歸責原則與損害賠償。臺北:元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE