摘要
侵权责任(损害赔偿)请求权与不当得利返还请求权的关系应当在'债'的体系中展开,债的概念是二者关系研究的逻辑起点。在承认非给付不当得利的基础上,侵权责任请求权与不当得利返还请求权会发生关联,对二者关系的理论和立法存在三种观点。从比较法的经验与我国目前的理论与实践来看,我们应当坚持竞合肯定说,这种竞合应当是'请求权竞合'而非'选择性竞合'。承认二者竞合应以肯定两种制度的独立性为前提,两种制度应各自严守本分和其构成要件,实现制度的衔接与协力,既不缺席也不越位。但在我国立法和司法解释中极少量的'请求权越界'问题可以作为例外存在,不会对两种请求权独立性产生较大冲击。
The relationship between the claims of torts(damages)and unjust enrichment should be discussed in the context of legal obligation,and the conception of"obligatio"is the logical origination in the research of the relationship between them.On the basis of admitting non-delivery unjust enrichment,there will be relevancies between the claims of torts and unjust enrichment.Theoretically and practically,there are three points of view on the relationship between them.From the angles of comparative law and the theory and practice of China,we should insist on concurrence,and this concurrence is the"concurrence of claim"and not the"optional concurrence".Admitting the concurrence of them should be based on the independence of two systems,and each system should have its domain.We should realize the combination and cooperation of the systems,and neither absence nor overstepping the limits.But some problems of"overstepping the bound of claim"in our legislation and judicial interpretations can be exceptions to that rule,and will not bring about much impact to the independence of each claim.
出处
《私法》
2008年第1期1-22+13,共22页
Private Law Review
关键词
侵权责任
不当得利
请求权竞合
The claims of torts
Unjust enrichment
Concurrence of claims
