|本期目录/Table of Contents|

[1]吴汉勇.“同命同价论”的再思考——对《侵权责任法》第17条的质疑[J].西安石油大学学报(社会科学版),2011,02:66-70.
 WU Hanyong.Reconsideration on “Every Life with the Same Price”—Questions on Article 17 of “the Tort Liability Law”[J].,2011,02:66-70.
点击复制

“同命同价论”的再思考——对《侵权责任法》第17条的质疑

《西安石油大学学报(社会科学版)》[ISSN:1008-5645/CN:61-1350/C]

期数:
2011年02期
页码:
66-70
栏目:
法学
出版日期:
2011-04-15

文章信息/Info

Title:
Reconsideration on “Every Life with the Same Price”
—Questions on Article 17 of “the Tort Liability Law”
作者:
吴汉勇
扬州大学 法学院,江苏 扬州 225009
Author(s):
WU Hanyong
School of Law, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, 225009, China
关键词:
生命权平等死亡赔偿金城乡户籍差距
Keywords:
equality of life right compensation for death difference of urban and rural household registration
分类号:
-
DOI:
-
文献标识码:
A
摘要:
《中华人民共和国侵权责任法》第17条规定"因同一侵权行为造成多人死亡的,可以以相同数额确定死亡赔偿金"。这一条款被许多媒体解读为"同命同价"的实现,甚至有媒体欢呼"同命不同价"已经终结了。然而,这一条款仅仅是规定在同一次的侵权行为中的赔偿标准相同,并没有达到真正意义上的"同命同价"的要求,只是有限范畴的"同命同价"原则。真正实现"同命同价"的方法是取消现行的城乡二元结构的死亡赔偿金制度,实现生命权的平等。
Abstract:
 It is stated in Article 17 of“The Tort Law of People’s Republic of China” that when many people died as a result of the same tort, they should be paid the same compensation for death”. This article is understood as realization of “every life with the same price” by multi-medias, even as the end of “every life with different price” by some medias. However, this article only regulates that the standard of compensation for death is equal in the identical tort, which doesn’t reach the demands of “every life with the same price” in real sense and only is the limited principle of “every life with the same price”. Actually, the real method to realize the “every life with the same price” is to call off the present system of compensation for death that is based on the dual structure of urban and rural areas, and realize the equality of life right.

参考文献/References

[1]田文生.三少女遭车祸“同命不同价”:农村少女遭车祸身亡赔偿不及城市户口同学一半[N].中国青年报,2006-01-24(2).
[2]王娜.社会不平等现象的法伦理思考[D].重庆:西南大学,2009.
[3]付子堂.法理学进阶[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[4]张新宝.侵权责任法原理[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2005.
[5]黄松有.最高人民法院人身损害赔偿司法解释的理解与适用[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2004.
[6][日]圆谷峻.判例形成的日本新侵权行为法[M].赵莉,译.北京:法律出版社,2008.
[7]于敏.日本侵权行为法[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[8]欧洲侵权法小组.欧洲侵权法原则文本与评注[M].于敏,谢鸿飞,译.北京:法律出版社,2009.
[9][德]马克西米利安·福克斯.侵权行为法[M].齐晓琨,译.北京:法律出版社,2006.〖ZK)〗
[10]胡雪梅.英国侵权法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2008.
[11]孙鹏.“生命的价值”:日本死亡损害赔偿的判例与学说[J].甘肃政法学院学报,2005(3).
[12]曾世雄.损害赔偿法原理[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001.
[13]史尚宽.债法总论[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000.
[14]张旭东.破解“同命不同价”难题的理论路径[J].现代法学,2008(6).
[15][美]罗尔斯.正义论[M].何怀宏,何包钢,廖申白,译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1988.
[16]沈宗灵.现代西方法理学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1992.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
-
更新日期/Last Update: 2011-06-23