论文部分内容阅读
自19世纪80年代迄至今日,伴随着工商业的快速发展,工伤事故显著增加。为加强保护劳动者利益,尽力转移或分散事故损害,除以传统的侵权行为法为基本救济途径之外,尚有基于社会福利思想而建立的工伤保险体制。这种双轨制救济制度,使得同一损害事实存在不同救济办法。那么,侵权行为损害赔偿与工伤保险损害赔偿这两者之间关系如何?该问题不但在理论上长期存有争议,而且关系当事人利益巨甚,实有探讨研究之价值。本文在对我国相关立法及司法案例进行梳理的基础上,通过对四种基本解决模式的比较分析,就我国关于工伤损害赔偿问题的模式选择提出建议。
Since the 1880s till now, with the rapid development of business and industry, the number of work-related injuries has increased significantly. In order to strengthen the protection of workers' interests and try their best to divert or disperse accident damage, besides the traditional tort law as the basic remedy, there is an industrial injury insurance system based on the idea of social welfare. This two-track system of relief allows for different remedies for the same damage. So what is the relationship between tort damages and industrial injury insurance damages? This issue not only remains controversial for a long time in theory, but also has great interests for the parties concerned. On the basis of sorting out the relevant legislation and judicial cases in our country, this article makes a comparative analysis of the four basic modes of settlement and puts forward some suggestions on the mode choice of the injury compensation in China.