查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 由民法第二百十三條第三項之修正看我國民法物之損害賠償責任理念的變動=Change to the Concept of Compensation for Property Damage in Terms of Modified Section 3, Article 213, Civil Law |
---|---|
作 者 | 王千維; | 書刊名 | 政大法學評論 |
卷 期 | 74 2003.06[民92.06] |
頁 次 | 頁1-60 |
分類號 | 584.2 |
關鍵詞 | 回復原狀; 金錢賠償; 被害客體; 應有狀態; 財產上結果損害; 完整利益; 價值利益; 交換價值; 使用價值; 損害補償理念; 自始客觀不能; 嗣後客觀不能; 以新換舊; 強迫得利; Restoration of prior conditions; Monetary compensation; Damaged object; Prior state; Consequential damage of properties; Complete interests; Value interests; Exchange value; Utilization value; Concept of compensation for damage; Unaffordable; Become unaffordable; Forced enrichment; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 自民法第二百十三條第三項修正增列之後,「回復原狀」與「金錢賠償」之對應關係,更足以彰顯我國民法在損害賠償方法上所採取的雙軌制。亦即就物之損害賠償而言,乃係以民法第二百十三條之規定為中心,而民法第二百十三條所彰顯的,乃係被害人(或債權人)之「完整利益」的保護,此處所謂「完整利益」之保護,乃係指未有侵害事實時,被害人(或債權人)現時或將來所應處狀態的“回復”,此即為損害賠償責任法上「回復原狀」之真義。至於民法第二百十四條以及第二百十五條所保護的,乃是被害客體之「價值利益」,因為相對應於「回復原狀」之「金錢賠償」,原則上即係物之財產上價值的賠償。此外,民法第一百九十六條乃係作為民法第二百十三條第三項之補充規定,其目的乃在於填補被害客體於修補而”回復“其完整性後,其財產上價值尚無法”回復“其應有狀態所生之損失。同時,有關「以新換舊」之問題,考諸民法第二百十三條第三項之規範精神,亦應將其重點置諸被害客體”回復“後所衍生之效果,而非在於其”回復“之過程。 |
英文摘要 | The relationship between the "restoration of the prior conditions" and "monetary compensation" stated in the modified Section 3, Article 213, demonstrates the double systems of the compensation system in the Civil Law of Taiwan. What Article 213 protects is the "complete interests" of victims or creditors. According to the definition of this article, the right of a victim or creditor shall be "restored" to its existing or expected state as if there were no infringement. This is also the real meaning of "restoration" in terms of compensation principles. On the other hand, what articles 214 and 215 protect is the "value interests" of the infringed object. In comparison with the "monetary compensation" in terms of the "restoration of prior conditions", what shall be compensated in accordance with articles 214 and 215 is the value of properties. Article 196 is a supplement to Section 3, Article 213. It is applicable when the value of the property cannot be "restored" to its prior state after the infringed object is repaired and "restored" to its original state. As for the 'change with a new object" in terms of Section 3, Article 213, the consequent result of the "restoration" is what this article wants to demonstrate, rather than the process of the "restoration". |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。