摘要
不同的归责原则体现不同的责任分配思想和责任承担基础,因此其责任主体的认定标准也不相同。《道路交通安全法》第76条没有采纳单一的归责原则,而是区分不同的责任范围和交通事故类型分别适用不同的归责原则。"运行支配和运行利益"是危险责任原则下保有者或者运行供用者的判断标准,因此将其作为我国机动车交通事故责任主体的判断标准必然与《道路交通安全法》第76条第(一)项所确立的过错责任相冲突。我国未来制定的民法典应当在厘清归责原则与责任主体之间关系的基础上,正确定位机动车交通事故责任的归责原则,并规定与之相适应的责任主体。
Different liability principle embodys different idea and theoretical basis, so the judging method of liability subject is different. Article 76 of Road Traffic Safety Law doesn＇t provide single responsibility principle, which distinguishs the scope of liability and type of road traffic accident. Actual control and operational interest is the standard of possessor, which bears no fault liability. Obviously, the standard is not compatible to Article 76 of Road Traffic Safety Law. China＇s Civil Code that will be enacted should provide retional liability principle and compatible liability subject.
出处
《时代法学》
2014年第6期20-26,共7页
Presentday Law Science
关键词
机动车交通事故
责任主体
归责原则
判断标准
vehicle accident liability
liability subject
liability principle
standard
