美国产品责任领域中的惩罚性赔偿的适用与规制——兼议我国《民法典》中惩罚性赔偿的规定
Application and Regulation of Punitive Damages in the Field of Product Liability in the United States—Also Discussing the Provisions of Punitive Damages in China’s Civil Code
DOI: 10.12677/DS.2023.94243, PDF,   
作者: 徐 欣：华东政法大学法律学院，上海
关键词: 产品责任；惩罚性赔偿；侵权行为； Product Liability； Punitive Damages； Tort
摘要: 纵观世界各地的惩罚性赔偿制度，以美国最为成熟。它拥有悠久的历史，自产生开始就存在广泛的争议，适用于产品责任领域后由于判决的数额之高引起人们的关注。所以在适用条件、证明标准、裁决的主体、赔偿金额、司法审查等各个方面，进行了一定的限制和改革。虽然我国的法律制度与美国迥然不同，但美国众多的关于惩罚性赔偿制度的案例和立法经验都为我国提供了借鉴。
Abstract: Throughout the world, the punitive damages system is the most mature in the United States. It has a long history and has been widely controversial since its inception, and its application to the field of product liability has caused concern due to the high amount of awards. Therefore, certain restrictions and reforms have been made in various aspects such as the conditions of application, standards of proof, the subject of the award, the amount of compensation, and judicial review. Although China’s legal system is very different from that of the United States, numerous cases and legislative experiences on punitive damages system in the United States have provided references for China.
文章引用：徐欣. 美国产品责任领域中的惩罚性赔偿的适用与规制——兼议我国《民法典》中惩罚性赔偿的规定[J]. 争议解决, 2023, 9(4): 1801-1811. https://doi.org/10.12677/DS.2023.94243

参考文献

[1] Rustad, M.L. (1997) How the Common Good Is Served by the Remedy of Punitive Damages. Tennessee Law Review, 64, 793-845.
[2] Owen, D.G. (1994) A Punitive Damages Overview: Functions, Problems and Reform. Villanova Law Review, 39, 363.
[3] Rustad, M. (1993) Thomas Koenig, The Historical Continuity of Punitive Damages Awards: Re-forming the Tort Reformers. The American University Law Review, 42, 1294-1296.
[4] 王利明. 美国惩罚性赔偿制度研究[J]. 比较法研究, 2003(5): 1-15.
[5] 董春华. 美国产品责任法中的惩罚性赔偿[J]. 比较法研究, 2008(6): 99-110.
[6] Greenleaf, S. (1899) A Treatise on the Law of Evidence. 16th Edition, Little, Brown, and Company, Bos-ton, 240, 2.
[7] Rustad, M.L. (1992) In Defense of Punitive Damages in Products Liability: Testing Tort Anecdotes with Empirical Data. Iowa Law Review, 78, 1.
[8] Schlueter, L.L. (2010) Punitive Damages. Matthew Bender, 1, 17-18.
[9] Sherwin, E. (2002) Clear and Convincing Evidence of Testamentary Intent: The Search for a Compromise between Formality and Adjudicative Justice. Connecticut Law Review, 34, 453-462.
[10] Owen, D.G. (1976) Punitive Damages in Products Liability Litigation. Michigan Law Review, 74, 1257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[11] Scheiner, A.H. (1991) Judicial Assessment of Punitive Damages, the Seventh Amendment, and the Politics of Jury Power. Columbia Law Review, 91, 142-164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[12] Mogin, P. (1998) Why Judges, Not Juries, Should Set Punitive Damages. The University of Chicago Law Review, 65, 179-223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[13] 朱广新. 美国惩罚性赔偿制度探究[J]. 比较法研究, 2022(3): 152-168.
[14] Kramer, M.E. (1980) Egan v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Co.: The Reasonable Relation Rule, the Tax Laws, and the Excessiveness of Punitive Damage Awards. UC Davis Law Review, 13, 357-365.
[15] Hines, L.J. and Hines, N.W. (2015) Constitutional Constraints on Punitive Damages: Clarity, Con-sistency, and the Outlier Dilemma. Hastings Law Journal, 66, 1257-1276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[16] Infelise, J.T. (1978) Punitive Damages and the Reasonable Relation Rule: A Study in Frustration of Purpose. Pacific Law Journal, 9, 823-852.

为你推荐