摘要
"无过错责任说"和"严格责任说"都不能对《侵权责任法》第7条作出合理的、令人信服的解释。无过错责任存在着定义上的逻辑矛盾等缺陷;严格责任为非理论化的简单概括,不兼容于我国侵权责任法。第7条应当理解为包含危险责任和牵连责任在内的各种过错外责任的概括规定。危险责任以危险为归责基础,以赔偿责任换取从事特别风险活动的正当性。牵连责任则以特殊的法律连带关系为归责基础,为他人承担责任。
Neither no-fault theory nor strict liability theory can make a reasonable and convincing explain to Article 7 of Tort Law. No-fauk theory has the deficiency of logical contradiction in definition. Strict liability is a non-theoretical simple summarization and it is incompatible to Chinese tort law. Article 7 should be interpreted as the general rule which includes danger liability, infection liability and all kinds of other liability besides fault. Danger liability makes danger as the imputation basis, and exchanges compensation liability for the legitimacy of taking especially dangerous activities. Infection liability makes special joint legal relations as the imputation basis and assumes liability for others.
出处
《韶关学院学报》
2010年第11期83-86,共4页
Journal of Shaoguan University
