交通事故侵權(quán)賠償與工傷賠償?shù)臎_突與協(xié)調(diào)

《交通事故侵權(quán)賠償與工傷賠償?shù)臎_突與協(xié)調(diào)》由會(huì)員上傳分享，免費(fèi)在線閱讀，更多相關(guān)內(nèi)容在行業(yè)資料-天天文庫。

1、交通事故侵權(quán)賠償與工傷賠償?shù)臎_突與協(xié)調(diào)摘要交通事故侵權(quán)損害賠償請(qǐng)求權(quán)屬于侵權(quán)法范疇,工傷保險(xiǎn)請(qǐng)求權(quán)則屬于工傷保險(xiǎn)法和勞動(dòng)法的范疇。兩者在基本思想、功能價(jià)值等方面存在諸多不同之處,在法律適用上存在沖突。針對(duì)這一沖突,我國法律法規(guī)對(duì)此曾作出過明確的適用指引,現(xiàn)有的法律法規(guī)、司法解釋對(duì)此態(tài)度極不明晰,司法實(shí)踐也不統(tǒng)一。比較法上存在四種較為典型的沖突協(xié)調(diào)模式,結(jié)合我國具體國情,替代模式是未來的發(fā)展趨勢(shì),區(qū)分的補(bǔ)充模式則是現(xiàn)實(shí)的選擇。本文共分為四章:第一章通過對(duì)幾則案例的分析,引出問題,即交通事故侵權(quán)損害

2、賠償請(qǐng)求權(quán)與工傷保險(xiǎn)請(qǐng)求權(quán)之間在實(shí)踐中存在沖突,各地法院在處理該沖突上態(tài)度不一;并對(duì)兩種請(qǐng)求權(quán)的沖突原因進(jìn)行簡(jiǎn)要的分析,基于兩者在基本思想、歸責(zé)原則、主體內(nèi)容、救濟(jì)等方面區(qū)別,而立法上卻沒有明確規(guī)定,使得兩種請(qǐng)求權(quán)之間存在規(guī)范上的競(jìng)合。第二章對(duì)美英德日及我國臺(tái)灣地區(qū)協(xié)調(diào)兩種請(qǐng)求權(quán)沖突的立法進(jìn)行簡(jiǎn)要考察,了解當(dāng)前發(fā)達(dá)國家和地區(qū)的立法現(xiàn)狀,并在此基礎(chǔ)上深入剖析協(xié)調(diào)兩種請(qǐng)求權(quán)沖突的理論基礎(chǔ),主要從各國已有及現(xiàn)存的協(xié)調(diào)模式入手,對(duì)各種模式的利弊予以分析,為我國沖突協(xié)調(diào)模式尋找有益元素。第三章對(duì)我國協(xié)調(diào)兩

3、種請(qǐng)求權(quán)的立法歷史軌跡進(jìn)行簡(jiǎn)要回顧,以厘清其歷史發(fā)展脈絡(luò),并對(duì)當(dāng)前立法進(jìn)行檢討,反思其不足,以便完善之;在立足于我國具體國情的基礎(chǔ)上,通過借鑒國外立法模式的有益成果,并對(duì)我國現(xiàn)存立法模式及學(xué)界觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行深入分析和研究,最終構(gòu)建一種適合我國具體實(shí)際的沖突協(xié)調(diào)模式。第四章對(duì)全文進(jìn)行簡(jiǎn)要概括,得出結(jié)論:替代模式是未來的發(fā)展趨勢(shì),而區(qū)分的補(bǔ)充模式是現(xiàn)實(shí)選擇。關(guān)鍵詞:交通事故;侵權(quán)賠償請(qǐng)求權(quán);工傷保險(xiǎn)請(qǐng)求權(quán);沖突;協(xié)調(diào)IAbstractTortClaimofTrafficAccidentisregulate

4、dbyInfringementLaw,whileInsuranceClaimofIndustrialInjuryisprotectedbyInsuranceLawofIndustrialInjuryandLaborLaw.Asmuchdifferenceexistsintheirphilosophicalfoundationandfunctionalvalue,theyhaveconflictinapplication.Therefore,lawsandregulationshavebeenma

5、detodirecttheapplication.However,regulationsandjudicialinterpretationarefarfromclear,andthejudicialpracticedoesnotcoincide.TherearefourtypicalmodestodealwiththeconflictsinComparativeLaw.Accordingtosituationsofournation,ModeofReplacementwouldbeatrendi

6、nthefuture,whiletheModeofDistinctiveSupplementisthebestchoosenowThisthesisisdividedintosixchaptersasfollows:Byanalyzingsomecases,thefirstchapterpointouttheproblemthatconflictexistsbetweentortclaimoftrafficaccidentandinsuranceclaimofindustrialinjury,a

7、ndjudicialpracticedoesnotcoincideonit.Andmakesananalysisofcausesthatresultinconflictbetweenthetwoclaims.Thatisbecausenodefiniteregulationsinlegislationregulatethedifferencesbetweenthetwoclaimsintheirphilosophicalfoundation,imputationprinciple,maincon

8、tent,reliefandsoon.Thesecondchapterdiscussesthemeritsanddemeritsoffourtypicalmodesbystudyingthetheoryfoundationofcoordinatingtheconflictbetweentheclaims,tryingtofindsomefavorableelements.Andmakesbriefinvestigationonlegislationtocoordinatetheconflicti