English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 111200/142120 (78%)
Visitors : 48109659      Online Users : 748
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
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/96756


    Title: 論侵權行為法之作為義務
    Other Titles: Duty to act in Torts
    Authors: 王怡蘋
    Wang, I-Ping
    Keywords: 作為義務;不作為侵害;間接侵害;信賴保護原則;事實管領能力;承擔特定任務;危險前行為;社會活動安全注意義務
    Indirect Infringement;Vicarious Liability;Liability for Damages;Verkehrssicherungspflicht;Duty of Care
    Date: 2010-08
    Issue Date: 2016-05-20 14:19:36 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 關於我國民法第一八四條第一項前段之規定，普遍肯認得以作為與不作為成立加害行為，惟不作為之侵害類型，以行為人負有作為義務為成立之前提，其理由在於積極作為與侵害結果具有直接關聯性，而不作為之類型，因欠缺直接關聯性，從而須以作為義務之有無認定損害結果歸屬。至於作為義務之有無，除依契約或法律規定外，我國學說與判決多有不同之說明與用字。與我國民法第一八四條第一項前段規定相當類似的是德國民法第八二三條第一項規定，而德國帝國法院於西元一九○二年首度以社會活動安全注意義務（Verkehrssicherungspflicht或Verkehrspflicht）為侵權責任之作為義務，即開啟侵權行為法中相關之研究與發展，不僅出現大量之法院判決，以社會活動安全注意義務建立責任人之作為義務，學說對其法律定位與類型，亦有廣泛之討論。有鑑於作為義務之重要性，故本文希望自我國之判決與學說，並參考德國關於社會活動安全注意義務之討論，討論我國侵權行為法之作為義務。
    The objective of infringement law is to prohibit intended or negligent infringement as well as to determine the liability of damage. If one actively infringes the other, such as striking someone with a stick, one can straight-forwardly affirm liability because of the connection between the action and the injury. But if an injury is caused by one’s non-action, or if one’s action indirectly results in an injury, it is problematic as to whether and when one should be liable for damages. Since 1902 “Verkehrssicherungspflicht” has been used to explain the liability of omitted action in Germany. Over the last ten years this idea has been recommend by many Taiwanese scholars and accepted by the courts. However, it is still unclear when “Verkehrssicherungspflicht” exists and the extent of its scope. Hence, the first part of this article intends to explain the nature and function of “Verkehrssicherungspflicht” in Germany. Further, this article intends to discuss the condition of liability of omitted action by analyzing various cases.
    Relation: 法學評論, 116, 47-102
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[政大法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    116(047-102).pdf667KbAdobe PDF22684View/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 Copyright Announcement
    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。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    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。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback