竞技性体育与休闲性体育中自甘风险原则的差异化适用研究
Differentiated Application of the Assumption of Risk Doctrine in Competitive and Recreational Sports
摘要: 对于体育伤害纠纷类案件,我国长期以来缺乏一个统一的法律依据,《民法典》第1176条确立的自甘风险原则,为此类案件提供了明确的裁判规则,其积极意义毋庸置疑。然而,法律的生命在于经验而非逻辑。将一条高度抽象的条文,机械地适用于形态万千的体育活动,不仅难以实现立法目的,反而可能造成新的不公。体育活动存在多种类型,从职业拳击赛到社区广场舞、从校级足球联赛到家庭周末登山,不同类型的体育活动其内在风险的发生机制、参与者的合理预期、行为合规性的判断标准等均存在本质性差异。这些差异决定了司法实践不能对所有体育活动一刀切地适用同一套自甘风险的判断标准,而必须走向更加类型化、精细化的适用路径。本文尝试将体育活动区分为竞技性体育与休闲性体育两种基本类型,深入剖析二者在风险固有程度、参与者注意义务、合规行为标准等方面的结构性差异,论证差异化适用的法理正当性,并以“过失”认定为核心,提出具体的区分标准与操作规则。
Abstract: For disputes arising from sports-related injuries, China has long lacked a unified legal basis. Article 1176 of the Civil Code, which establishes the doctrine of assumption of risk, provides a clear adjudicative rule for such cases, and its positive significance is beyond doubt. However, the life of law lies in experience rather than logic. Mechanically applying a highly abstract provision to the diverse forms of sporting activities not only fails to achieve the legislative purpose but may also result in new forms of injustice. Sporting activities vary widely—from professional boxing matches to community square dancing, from school-level football leagues to family weekend hiking. Different types of sports exhibit fundamental differences in the mechanisms of inherent risk, participants’ reasonable expectations, and the standards for determining compliant conduct. These differences necessitate that judicial practice avoid a one-size-fits-all application of the assumption of risk doctrine, and instead adopt a more typified and refined approach. This paper attempts to classify sporting activities into two basic categories—competitive sports and recreational sports—analyzes in depth their structural differences in terms of inherent risk, participants’ duty of care, and standards of lawful conduct, and demonstrates the jurisprudential justification for differentiated application. Focusing on the determination of “negligence”, it further proposes specific criteria and operational rules for such differentiation.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
张耀文, 田野. 体育运动场域下的安全保障义务——兼评《中华人民共和国民法典》第1198条[J]. 武汉体育学院学报, 2021, 55(8): 49-56.
|
|
[2]
|
刘岳松, 罗刚. 《民法典》自甘风险规则适用研究[J]. 内江师范学院学报, 2023, 38(5): 107-112.
|
|
[3]
|
曹权之. 民法典“自甘风险”条文研究[J]. 东方法学, 2021(4): 121-138.
|
|
[4]
|
安雨彤. 论自甘风险规则的司法适用[J]. 河南工程学院学报(社会科学版), 2022, 37(4): 52-59.
|
|
[5]
|
王伟. 竞技体育运动员致害的侵权赔偿定位分析[J]. 山东理工大学学报(社会科学版), 2010, 26(2): 41-46.
|
|
[6]
|
陈寅雪. 《民法典》自甘冒险制度的司法适用分析[J]. 法制博览, 2022(12): 90-92.
|
|
[7]
|
薛贤琼. 侵权视阈下体育活动中的自甘风险适用问题[J]. 吕梁学院学报, 2021, 11(1): 61-65.
|
|
[8]
|
杨佩霞, 余煜刚. 竞技体育伤害侵权责任及合理规避——以竞技规则为视角[J]. 湖南工业大学学报(社会科学版), 2012, 17(4): 90-94.
|
|
[9]
|
许丁悦, 修艳玲. 自甘风险规则的适用范围及适用主体研究[J]. 福建技术师范学院学报, 2024, 42(6): 86-94.
|
|
[10]
|
https://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/periodical/CiBQZXJpb2RpY2FsQ0hJU29scjkyMDI2MDUwOTEwMzIzNRIXbnhkeHhiLXJ3c2hreGIyMDIzMDEwMTIaCGE3cnRuMm1h
|