摘要惩罚性赔偿制度作为英美法中一项重要的损害赔偿制度，其理论与大陆法系强调赔偿的补偿性的传统存在较大的差异。我国首先在《消费者权益保护法》中引入了惩罚性赔偿，并在其后的《食品安全法》、《侵权责任法》中都作了相关规定。但研究这些规定发现，我国的惩罚性赔偿制度并不完善，惩罚性赔偿责任的构成要件的设置不合理，惩罚性赔偿数额的确定也不科学。我国惩罚性赔偿的法律实践表明，惩罚性赔偿构成要件中的主观要件需要考虑充分，将“明知”解释为“确定知道”和“应当知道”，对损害后果的要求可限于“足以造成健康严重损害”。赔偿数额的确定上可以设置为损失的三倍同时设置最低限额，在基数的选择上还应考虑受害者的维权成本。立法和适用过程中兼顾法律责任的均衡也是十分重要的。87714

毕业论文关键词  惩罚性赔偿 构成要件 赔偿数额 责任均衡

毕 业 论 文 外 文 摘 要

Title    Reexamination  of  Punitive  Damages               

Abstract As an important damages in common law, punitive damages’ concept is different from the compensation tradition of civil law。 The Chinese legislature first established punitive damages in the Law on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests。 Then punitive damages appeared in the Law on Food Safety and the Tort Liability Law。 After studying these rules, we can see some defects which may cause a range of problems。 The setting of constitutive elements is not accurate, and the rules of amount aren’t scientific as well。 Through the study of history and cases of punitive damages in China, the subjective aspects should be explained correctly, including “definitely know” and “should know”。 The requirement of consequences of damage can be limited to “enough to cause aggravated damages to health”。 Three times of damages and setting the lowest amount are suitable, while the cost of rights should be taken into consideration about the base of damages’ amount。 Meanwhile, it’s significant to balance the responsibility of both public and private law during legislation and application。 From+优!尔.YouErw.com 加QQ75201`8766

Keywords  Punitive damages； Constitutive elements； Amount； Balance of responsibility

目   录

1  引言 1

2  惩罚性赔偿制度的要义 2

2。1 惩罚性赔偿的内涵 2

2。2 惩罚性赔偿与补偿性赔偿的关系 2

2。3 惩罚性赔偿的正当性 3

3  惩罚性赔偿制度的法律实践 4

3。1 《消费者权益保护法》中的惩罚性赔偿制度 4

3。2 合同领域中的惩罚性赔偿制度 5

3。3 《食品安全法》中的惩罚性赔偿制度 6

3。4 《侵权责任法》中的惩罚性赔偿制度 6

3。5 其他领域的惩罚性赔偿制度 7

4  惩罚性赔偿制度的缺失 9

4。1 惩罚性赔偿构成要件设置不合理