我国民法上是否存在无过错责任原则?争论一直激烈,意见极不一致。我认为有必要再加以说明。关于无过错责任原则的含义,在近代民法理论上几乎形成了一种固定的见解,我认为应该重新加以探究。无过错责任的固有含义,是民事责任的成立不以行为人有过错为要件。就是说,对损害的发生,行为人虽然无过错,亦应负赔偿责任。但这并不意味着行为人对其行为造成的损害,在任何情况下都要负赔偿责任。各国立法例多承认行为人可以提出特定的抗辩或免责事由。赋予无过错责任这样的含义,其优点是:根据法律的直接规定或遵循先例,可以直接根 Whether there is a principle of no-fault liability in civil law in our country? The debate has been fierce and the opinions are extremely inconsistent. I think it necessary to explain. As to the meaning of the principle of no-fault liability, there is almost a fixed opinion in modern civil law theory, and I think it should be re-explored. The inherent implication of faultless liability is that the establishment of civil liability is not a fault of the perpetrator. In other words, the perpetrator, though without fault, should also be liable for damages. However, this does not mean that the perpetrator will be liable for damages caused by his actions and will be liable under any circumstances. Legislation in many countries recognize that the perpetrator can propose specific defenses or exemptions. The connotation of giving a liability without fault has the advantage that according to the direct provisions of law or following precedents,