政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/98057
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 90773/120835 (75%)
Visitors : 25095127      Online Users : 318
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/98057


    Title: 美國法上懲罰性賠償金數額分享制度之研究
    Other Titles: A Study on the Split-Recovery Punitive Damages System under U.S. Laws
    Authors: 戴志傑
    Tai, Chih-Chieh
    Keywords: 填補性賠償金;懲罰性賠償金;數額分享法令;消費者保護基金;徵收條款;平等保護條款;過度罰金條款;正當法律程序條款
    Compensatory Damages;Punitive Damages;Split-recovery Statute;Consumer Protection Fund;Takings Clause;Equal Protection Clause;Excessive Fines Clause;\Due Process Clause
    Date: 2015-03
    Issue Date: 2016-06-20 14:23:20 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 近年來黑心產品致害事件頻傳,故消基會即提出「消費者保護\r 基金」草案,明訂該基金創設上之法源依據及其目的,並規範該基\r 金之經費來源。然儘管該草案立意甚佳,但細究其內容仍有諸多疑\r 慮與商榷之處。是故,因現今美國法上已有若干州施行懲罰性賠償\r 金數額分享法令而實踐如同上開基金之目的,從而本文即研究該國\r 此等數額分享制度,其中包括該制度之公共政策及其實踐疑慮,以\r 及其已涉合憲性爭議的相關判決,尤其是聯邦最高法院於二○○七\r 年Philip Morris USA v. Williams乙案判決後,論者間對該制度存廢\r 與修正上所提出的相關意見。最後,希冀以該國此等制度之實踐經\r 驗為鑑而供我國未來立法上之參考。
    Since damaging events caused by defective products have occurred frequently in recent years, the Consumers’ Foundation proposed the Consumer Protection Fund Draft, which stipulated the legal bases and purposes of creating the fund and also regulates the fund’s sources of funding. Although the idea of the draft is good, there is still room for doubts and questions concerning its contents. Since certain states in the U.S. already have enacted such split-recovery statutes through carrying out the methods that are similar to the purposes of the funds mentioned above, this thesis, therefore, examines the sharing system of U.S. public policy, its practical concerns, and its relevant decisions challenged by constitutionality. Especially, the study examines the decision for the case of Philip Morris USA v. Williams by the Supreme Court in 2007 and scholarly concerns and studies on the abolition of the system. Finally, it takes the practical experience of these systems as a reference to provide a resource for Taiwan’s future legislative references.
    Relation: 法學評論, 140,287-371頁
    Chengchi law review
    Data Type: article
    DOI link: http://dx.doi.org/10.3966%2f102398202015030140005
    DOI: 10.3966/102398202015030140005
    Appears in Collections:[Chengchi law review ] Journal Articles

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    140(287-371).pdf1165KbAdobe PDF244View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback