نقد و توجیه رویکردهای تحققی و اقتصادی به مفهوم تقصیر در مسئولیت مدنی و آثار عملی آن در دعاوی مرتبط

نوع مقاله: مقاله علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار گروه حقوق خصوصی دانشگاه تهران

2 دانشجوی دکتری حقوق خصوصی دانشگاه تهران

چکیده

فارغ از مواردی که قانون یا قرارداد نحوۀ احراز تقصیر عامل زیان را مشخص می‌کنند، مسئلۀ چگونگی احراز تقصیر پیچیده و محتمل‌الوجوه است.این تحقیق در صدد پاسخ به این سؤال است که پرسش از تقصیرآمیز بودن رفتار، آیا پرسشی توصیفی است یا هنجاری؟ به تعبیر دیگر، وقتی دادرس در پی احراز تقصیر خوانده در دعوای مسئولیت مدنی است، آیا بایستی همانند دانشمندان تجربی در جهان خارج به تجربه بپردازد و پس از کشف رفتار متعارف (رفتاری که بیشترین تکرار را داراست) در خصوص قضیۀ متنازع‌فیه، انحراف رفتار خوانده را با آن بسنجد؟ یا آنکه فارغ از اینکه درواقع چه رفتاری به چه میزان معمول است، وی باید انسانی ایدئال (که اصلاً در جهان وجود خارجی ندارد) را درنظر بگیرد و میزان انحراف رفتار خوانده را با آن بسنجد. به عبارت دیگر، آیا معیار در احراز تقصیر، انحراف از رفتار انسان متعارف است یا انسان معقول؟ در این تحقیق نشان دادیم که رویکرد توصیفی به مفهوم تقصیر غیرمنطقی است. روش تحقیق کتابخانه‌ای و میدانی است. در دو گفتار به بررسی رویکرد هنجاری و توصیفی خواهیم پرداخت.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

A Case for Positive and Economic-Based Approaches to Reasonableness in Tort Law and their Practical Implications

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohsen Sadeghi 1
  • Amir Ghaffari 2
1 Associate Professor, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, University of Tehran
2 Phd student in Private Law, University of Tehran
چکیده [English]

In spite of some instances in which statute or contract specifically determines the approach by which the standard of care is to be tested, the notion of Reasonable Man which plays a crucial role at the heart of Duty of Care is an ambiguous and abstruse issue. The Article sets forth an answer to the following question: Should reasonableness be a normative or a positive notion? In other words, should the reasonable person be defined in accordance with a normative ethical commitment or in accordance with an empirically observed practice or perception? We put forward and defend the thesis that positive approach is illogical and normative approach, namely Economic Welfare approach, is categorically sound, although the latter raises partially surmountable practical problems. This Article is basically founded on Documentary Research and Literature Review and is presented in two parts; The first involves dealing with the positive approach and the latter with the normative one.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Philosophy of Tort Law
  • Reasonable Person
  • Fault
  • Normative and Descriptive
1. فارسی
1. ایران‌پور، فرهاد (1398)، تحلیل اقتصادی در حقوق خصوصی، تهران: دنیای اقتصاد
2. بادینی، حسن (1384)، فلسفۀ مسئولیت مدنی، تهران: سهامی انتشار
3. کاتوزیان، ناصر (1393)، الزام‌های خارج از قرارداد: مسئولیت مدنی، ج 1، چ 13، تهران: دانشگاه تهران،
4. بادینی، حسن (1382)، «مبانی فلسفی نگرش اقتصادی به حقوق»، مجلۀ دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، ش 62.
2. انگلیسی
A) Books
5. American Law Institute (2010), Restatement (Third) of Torts: Liability For Physical and Emotional Harm
6. Armour, Jody David (2000), Negrophobia and Reasonable Racism: The Hidden Costs of Being Black in America, NYU Press.
7. Englard, Izhak (1993), The Philospohy of Tort Law, Dartmouth Pub. Co.
8. Hume, David (2011), A Treatise of Human Nature, CreatSpace Independent Publishing Platform
9. Hans-Berndt Schafer, Claus Ott, The Economic Analysis of Civil Law, Translated by Matthew Braham, Edward Elgar Pub., (2005)
10. Holmes, Oliver Wendel (1991), The Common Law, Dover Publication
11. Landes, William M., Posner, Richard A. (1987), The Economic Structure of Tort Law, Harvard University Press
12. Le Guin, Ursula K. (1975), The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas, in The wind’s Twelve Quarters
13. Shavell, Steven M. (1987), Economic Analysis of Accident Law, Harvard University Press
14. Wacks, Raymond(2012), Undertanding Jurisprudence: An Introduction to Legal Theory, Oxford University Press.
 
B) Articles
15. Abraham, Kenneth S. (2001), "The Trouble with Negligence", 54 Vanderbilt Law Review
16. Bohlen, Francis A. (1924), "Mixed Questions of Law and Fact", 72 University of Pennsylvania Law Review
17. Coleman, Jules L. (2003), "The Grounds of Welfare", 112 Yale Law Journal
18. Cooter, Robert D. (2000), "Three Effects of Social Norms on Law: Expression, Deterrence, and Internalization", 79 Oregon Law Review
19. Cooter, Robert D. & Porat, Ariel (2001), "Should Courts Deduct Nonlegal Sanctions from Damages?", 30 Journal of Legal Studies
20. Cooter, Robert D. (1989), "Punitive Damages for Deterrence: When and How Much?", 40 Alabama Law Review
21. Dolinko, David (2002), "The Perils of Welfare Economics", 97 Northwestern University Law Review
22. Dorff, Michael B. (2002), "Why Welfare Depends on Fairness: A Reply to Kaplow and Shavell", 75 Southern California Law Review
23. Dressler, Joshua (1995), "When "Heterosexual" Men Kill "Homosexual" Men: Reflections on Provocation Law, Sexual Advances, and the "Reasonable Man" Standard", 85 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology
24. Dworkin, Ronald M. (1980), "Is Wealth a Value?", 9 Journal of Legal Studies
25. Englard, Izhak (1980), "The System Builders: A Critical Appraisal of Modern American Tort Theory", 9 Journal of Legal Studies
26. Goldberg, John C.P. (2003), "Twentieth-Century Tort Theory", 91 The Georgetown Law Journal
27. Fischhoff, Baruch (1982), "For Those Condemned To Study the Past: Heuristicsand Biases" in Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (Daniel Kahneman et al. eds.)
28. Fleming, John G. (1984), "Is There a Future for Tort?", 44 Louisiana law Review
29. Geistfeld, Mark A. (2001), "Reconciling Cost-Benefit Analysis with the Principle that Safety Matters More than Money", 76 New York University Law Review
30. Gilles, Stephen G. (2001), "On Determining Negligence: Hand Formula Balancing, the Reasonable Person Standard, and the Jury", 54 Vanderbilt law Review
31. Grady, Mark F. (1988), "Why Are People Negligent? Technology, Nondurable Precautions, and the Medical Malpractice Explosion", 82 Northwestern University Law Review
32. Hurd, Heidi M. (2001), "Is It Wrong To Do Right When Others Do Wrong?: A Critique of American Tort Law", 7 Legal Theory
33. Hylton, Keith N. (1998), "Punitive Damages and the Economic Theory of Penalties, 87 The Georgetown Law Journal
34. Jolls, Christine(1998), "Behavioral Economic Analysis of Redistributive Legal Rules", 51 Vanderbilt Law Review
35. Jolls, Christine et al. (1998), "A Behavioral Approach to Law and Economics", 50 Stanford Law Review
36. Latin, Howard A. (1985), Problem-Solving Behavior and Theories of Tort Liability, 73 California Law Review
37. Miller, Allan D., Perry, Stephen (2012), "The Reasonable Person", 87 NYU Law Review
38. Morris, Clarence (1942), "Custom and Negligence", 42 Columbia Law Review
39. Kaplow, Louis & Shavell, Steven (2001), "Fairness Versus Welfare", 114 Harvard Law Review
40. Logue, Kyle D. (1994), "Solving the Judgment-Proof Problem", 72 Texas Law Review  
41. Polinsky, Mitchell & Shavell, Steven (1998), "Punitive Damages": An Economic Analysis, 111 Harvard Law Review
42. Perry, Stephen R. (2001), "Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Negligence Standard", 54 Vanderbilt Law Review
43. Posner, Richard A. (1972), "A Theory of Negligence", 1 Journal of Legal Studies
44. Posner, Richard A. (1995), "Wealth Maximization and Tort Law: A Philosophical Inquiry", in Phislosophical Foundations of Tort Law (David G. Owen ed.)
45. Rabin, Robert L. (1981), The Historical Development of the Fault Principle: A Reinterpretation, 15 Georgia Law Review
46. Rachlinski, Jeffrey J. (2000), The "New" Law and Psychology: A Reply to Critics, Skeptics, and Cautious Supporters, 85 Cornell Law Review
47. Rachlinski, Jeffrey J. (1998), "A Positive Psychological Theory of Judging in Hindsight", 65 University of Chicago Law Review
48. Ramsey, Carolyn B. (2003), "Homicide on Holiday: Prosecutorial Discretion, Popular Culture, and the Boundaries of the Criminal Law", 54 Hastings Law Journal
49. Schwartz, Gary T. (1994), "Reality and the Economic Analysis of Tort Law: Does Tort Law Really Deter?", 42 UCLA Law Review
50. Schwartz, Gary T. (1990), "The Ethics and the Economics of Tort Liability Insurance", 75 Cornell Law Review
51. Schwartz, Gary T. (2002), Empiricism and Tort Law, University of Illinois Law Review
52. Shavell, Steven M. (1986), "The Judgment Proof Problem", 6 International Review of Law and Economics
53. Shavell, Steven M. (2007), "On the Proper Magnitude of Punitive Damages: Mathias v. Accor Economy Lodging, Inc.", 120 Harvard Law Review
54. Simons, Kenneth W. (2001), "The Hand Formula in the Draft Restatement (Third) of Torts: Encompassing Fairness as Well as fficiency Values", Vanderbilt Law Review
55. Sloan, Frank A. & Hsieh, Chee R. (1995), "Injury, Liability, and the Decision To File a Medical Malpractice Claim", 29 Law and Society Review
56. Slovic, Paul, et al. (1982), "Facts Versus Fears: Understanding Perceived Risk", in Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and (Daniel Kahneman et al. eds.)
57. Sugarman, Stephen D. (1985), "Doing Away with Tort Law", 73 California Law Review
58. Summers, "The Case of the Disappearing Defendant: An Economic Analysis", 132 University of Pennsylvania Law Review (1983)
59. Sunstein, Cass R. (1997), "Behavioral Analysis of Law", 64 The University of Chicago Law Review
60. Sunstein, Cass R. et al. (1998), "Assessing Punitive Damages (with Notes on Cognition and Valuation in Law)", 107 Yale Law Journal
61. Tay, Alice Erh-Soon (1969), "The Foundation of Tort Liability in a Socialist Legal System: Fault Versus Social Insurance in Soviet Law", 19 University of Toronto Law Journal
62. Taylor, Shelley E. (1982), "The Availability Bias in Social Perception and Interaction", in Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (Daniel Kahneman et al. eds.)
63. Tobia, Kevin P. (2018), "How People Judge What is Reasonable", Alabama Law review
64. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel (1982), "Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases", in Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (Daniel Kahneman et al. eds.)
65. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel (1982), "Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability", in Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases  (Daniel Kahneman et al. eds.)
66. Westen, Peter (2008), "Individualizing the Reasonable Person in Criminal Law", 2 Criminal Law and Philosophy
67. Zalesne, Deborah (1997), "The Intersection of Socioeconomic Class and Gender in Hostile Housing Environment Claims Under Title VIII: Who is the Reasonable Person?", 38 Boston College Law Review
68. Zipursky, Benjamin C. (2007), "Sleight of Hand", 48 William and Mary Law Review
69. Zipursky, Benjamin C. (1998), "Rights, Wrongs, and Recourse in the Law of Torts", 51 Vanderbilt Law Review