2010年10月思想汇报,后宫宜修传,健康知识
The Role that Tort Law Play in the Australia侵权法在澳大利亚的作用
澳大利亚侵权法的法律渊源是复杂的，包括继承自英国法的法律原则，以及独立国家和其他普通法国家的法律原则，以及澳大利亚自身法律发展过程中形成的原则。（McDonald，Barbara，2005:443）这些原则存在于不同的领域，给法官和当事人在众多案件中找出最合适的法律原则带来了极大的不便。（Jane Stapleton，2003:135）由于不同的理解，在特定情况下，即使相同的原则也可能不一致。
Legal source of Tort law in Australia is complex, including legal principles inherited from English law, and legal principles of the Untied States and other common law countries, as well as principles formed during Australia’s own legal development. (McDonald, Barbara, 2005: 443) These principles existed in different areas, which have caused great inconvenience to the Judge and the parties to find out the most suitable legal principle among so many cases. (Jane Stapleton, 2003: 135) Because of different understandings, even the same principles might be used inconsistently in specific situations.
2001年6月，澳大利亚联邦政府任命新南威尔士州上诉法院法官大卫·安德鲁·伊普（David Andrew IPP）领导一个由四位专家组成的审查澳大利亚侵权法的小组。专家组讨论和审查了公众最常质疑的问题，包括：侵权责任的确定标准相当模糊；受害人获得赔偿太容易；人身伤害赔偿数额太大等（门德尔松D.，2004:492-509），专家组于2002年9月提交特德向联邦政府提交了侵权法审查的最终报告，其中对普通法和相关的成文法体系提出了61项建议。尽管存在争议，但大多数关于IPP报告建议的建议都被澳大利亚联邦和州议会采纳，并迅速做出了相应的调整和修订。从2002年到2004年，澳大利亚议会制定并修订了36部法令。
In June 2001, the federal government of Australia appointed Judge David Andrew Ipp of Court of Appeal of New South Wales to lead a four-expert panel reviewing the Tort law of Australia. The expert panel have discussed and reviewed problems the most frequently questioned by public, which include: the determining standards of tort liability are quite vague; it’s too easy for victims to get compensations; the amount of personal injury compensation is too large, etc. (Mendelson D., 2004: 492-509) In September 2002, the panel submitted the final report of tort law review to the federal government, which put forward 61 proposals to the common law and related statute law system. Although there is controversy, most proposals of what the Ipp report has suggested was adopted by the Australian federal and state parliament, and have made the corresponding adjustment and revision quickly. Form 2002 to 2004, the Australian parliament has formulated and revised 36 statute laws.
侵权法有两个主要目的。一方面为受害方提供救济和补偿；另一方面为规范民事主体的行为。澳大利亚侵权法改革在调整赔偿目的的前提下，对侵权责任的评估标准进行了规定和规范，以帮助民事主体更好地了解自己的行为。在这种情况下，民事主体在进行具有潜在风险的行为时，可以预先进行预防，以减少侵权行为的同时发生。此外，侵权法改革不仅强调了对侵权人的照顾义务，而且强调了对受害人的照顾义务，使受害人也关注自己的行为标准，提高了自身的安全意识。
The tort law has two main purposes. On the one hand, it aims providing remedy and compensation to the injured party; on the other hand, it devotes to regulate behaviors of civil subjects. On the premise of adjusting the compensation purpose, Tort law reform in Australia has specified and regulated evaluation standards of tort liability, to help civil subjects understand their own behaviors better. In that case, when conducting behaviors with potential risks, the civil subjects could be able to make the prevention in advance, so as to reduce the concurrence of infringement. Besides, tort law reform does not only stress the duty of care of infringing party, but also stress the duty of care of victim, which makes the victim also pay attention to their behavior standards, so as to improve their safety awareness. (Wright, E. W., 2006: 6-12)
The statutory Tort law specifically focuses on some concepts and principles which are easy ignored or misunderstood in the practical application, using unified and regulated articles to explain these concepts and principles, properly adjusting the controversial legal principles, and by using a demonstration case to provide compensation degree for similar cases. Also, it’s important to note that, though the statutory Tort law in Australia has higher legal status, it can only be used as an effective supplement of the common law, which cannot replace the main function of the common law.
Referencing
McDonald, Barbara (2005). Legislative Intervention in the Law of Negligence: The
Common Law, Statutory Interpretation and Tort Reform in Australia. Sydney
Law Review, 27 (3): 443.
Mendelson D. (2004). Australian tort law reform: statutory principles of causation
and the common law. J Law Med, 11(4): 492-509.
Jane Stapleton (2003). The Golden Thread at the Heart of Tort Law: Protection of the
Vulnerable. 24 Australian Bar Review, 135.
Wright, E. W. (2006) National trends in personal injury litigation: before and after Ipp.
Brief, Vol. 33, No. 7: 6-12.
“Review of the Law of Negligence Final Report”, retrieved 30 Nov 2016.
|
