| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立成功大學 === 法律學系 === 103 === SUMMARY
As we pursue higher technology, the basic concept of “no fault, no liability” in the traditional civil tort liability system is no longer “enough” for the balance between the interest of the tortfeasors and potential victims; thus, practitioners and scholars started exploring for a new kind of legislative model, and the “liability for dangerous activities” was introduced. It takes “danger” as the main accountable factor, setting up a new kind of liability in Tort Law.
This thesis explores two topics of liability for dangerous activities. First, it examines foreign legislative systems, such as Principles of European Tort Law (PETL) , Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR), German dangerous theory, Common Law and Italian Civil Code. Using these legal systems as base, this thesis tries to find the legitimacy and theoretical foundation of the liability for dangerous activities from traditional tort law. Second, it focuses on the liability for dangerous activities in Taiwan tort law system. In addition to reforming the system of liability for dangerous activities in Taiwan Civil Code and other specific statutes, it especially examines articles and cases relating to Article 191-3 of Civil Code, analyzes its crucial factors and clarifies responsibility. As a result, it sets up a basic examination standard and the types of classified dangerous activities which are applicable for Article 191-3 of Civil Code to reduce disputes in practice.
Key Words: Torts, Dangerous activities, Risk liability, Presumption of negligence
INTRODUCTION
Tort Liability is traditionally based on fault. However, in the nineteenth-century, draftsmen started to argue that fault liability is not longer enough for incidents caused by new technology and tried to introduce the liability for dangerous activities in order to find a balance between the interest of tortfeasors and victims. This type of liability can be compared to risk liability (Gefährdungshaftung) in Germany or strict liability in Common Law.
This thesis researches for historical explanation and theoretical foundation of the liability for dangerous activities in Tort Law. In order comprehensively observe the liability for dangerous activities from different point of views, it reviews several foreign law systems and theories relating to the liability for dangerous activities, including the quasi law of delict in Roman law, the liability for guardian in French Civil Code, two drafts for European Union, the risk liability in German Law, the strict liability in Common Law and the dual liability system in Italian Civil Code.
Additionally, this thesis focuses on the development of the system of liability for dangerous activities in Taiwan Civil Code and other specific statutes, especially the Article 191-3 of Civil Code. It also examines relevant studies and cases from the past two decades in order to reform the system of liability for dangerous activities in Taiwan and establish a more precise standard for the Article 191-3 of Civil Code.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In different law regimes, the legislative model of liability for dangerous activities can be classified into three categories: specific provisions for several kinds of dangerous activities, common provision for the standard of dangerous activities and mixed provisions. Within these three categories are various statutory methods, providing more firm or flexible standards in practice; therefore, legislators should choose a model most suitable for their countries.
In Taiwan, after enacting the Article 191-3 of Civil Code in 1999, mixed provision was adopted for the system of liability for dangerous activities. Hence, the Article 191-3 of Civil Code initiated a lot of debates, including its basic requirements: the subject to liability, the presumption of diligence and causation, the scope of dangerous activities, etc.
CONCLUSION
The purpose of this thesis is to research not only for the legitimacy of liability for dangerous activities, but also to clarify these arguments in practice and provide an adequate standard for Article 191-3 of Taiwan Civil Code.
First, since the core of civil tort liability is damage redistribution, there are reasons why liability for dangerous activities takes “danger” as the main accountable factor to distribute the risk of harm. According to the concept of commutative justice in Nicomachean Ethics and the theory of risk liability in Germany, if the liability for dangerous activities takes danger as its main accountability to make people who engage in dangerous activities take responsibility, the reasons for its legitimacy could be the initiation of the danger, the superior ability to control danger, the profit from the danger.
Second, referring to relevant foreign legal system and court cases, the adequate standard for Article 191-3 of Civil Code should take into account the following factors: the uncertainty of damage, the seriousness of harm and the non-natural behavior. As a conclusion, the purpose of this thesis is to reduce the dispute of Article 191-3 of Civil Code and exhibit the positive effects of developing a more precise examination standard for the liability for dangerous activities in Taiwan more complete.
|
|---|
