论英美法上的纯粹精神损害赔偿.pdfVIP

法上的“精神打击”制度，通过性质分析将其归属于纯粹精神损害赔 偿制度，并通过典型案例探索其发展历程；第三部分对美国法上故意 或严重不负责任导致的纯粹精神损害和过失导致的纯粹精神损害进 行分类，对比考察他们的构成要件和限制规则；第四部分主要是介绍 我国关于精神损害赔偿的立法和司法解释以及具体内容；第五部分通 过比较分析英美法上的纯粹精神损害赔偿制度与我国的精神损害赔 偿制度，对我国应否引入纯粹精神损害赔偿制度以及应在那些具体方 面学习借鉴纯粹精神损害赔偿制度提出本文观点。 【关键词】纯粹精神损害 精神打击 适用范围 限制规则 Abstract Traditional Anglo-American tort law tend to take the mental damage as the consequence of physical harm to the extent that mental damage was in a unclear state.In modern days , with increasing emphasis on human mental health and peace , in judicial practice ,separate spiritual interests began and gradually increased to an action for damages. The people began torealizetheinvisiblementaldistresswithtangiblephysical damage as intolerable, mental distress can stand alone as the causeofactiontoseekcompensation.Thus,thecourtabandoned the mental damage as incidental practice causes of action, purely emotional distress gradually become an independent compensation for moral damage type. At the same time, out of concerns about the action flood common law countries have been cautious about purely emotional distress. The scope of purely emotional distress has been gradually expanded, but a varietyofrestrictiverulesisalsoconstantlybeingimproved. The problem ofhow to find a balance between victims right and freedom of action is always accompanied by purely emotional distresscompensation system development process. China,since the enactment of the Tort Liability Act ,for emotional distress protection, a major leap from the right to the interestshasbeentaken.Andthatisconsistentwithourlegal tradition, also has adapted to the development trend of the times. But we should also see, the provisions of the Tort LiabilityAct,ontheemotionaldistressisalittlecareless, manydetailsoftheproblemdosenotinvolved,soastothelack of a clear legal basis for the judge in deciding a case. This issue, the legal profession in China is actively strive to improve. The