破解同命不同价难题的理论路径.docVIP

破解同命不同价难题的理论路径 目录 TOC \o 1-9 \h \z \u 目录 1 正文 1 文1：破解同命不同价难题的理论路径 1 一、“同命不同价”：对死亡赔偿金的城乡差别标准的质疑 2 二、“继承丧失说”：现行死亡赔偿金城乡差别标准的理论依据 5 文2：破解铁打的营盘流水的兵难题 16 参考文摘引言： 18 原创性声明（模板） 19 文章致谢（模板） 19 正文 破解同命不同价难题的理论路径 文1：破解同命不同价难题的理论路径 Abstract:The different compeatio for the death of non-farme and farme provided in the Judicial Interpretation of Peonal Injury Compeation have provoked a heated debate on the issue of “similar lives but with different values.” Indeed, the existing Interpretation assumes the doctrine of “loss of inheritance” to cotruct the death compeation provided in relevant laws. It coide that death compeation is for the loss of future earnings, which falls within the ambit of property loss compeation rather than moral injury compeation. Theoretically, the problem of “similar lives but with different values” results from the doctrine of “loss of inheritance.” The doctrine of “damage of death and injury” is opposed to “loss of inheritance” and other theories that admit that different sort of people should be compeated differently. It maintai that death or peonal injury per se is a sort of damage and deprival of life is a non-property loss in general meaning. While making compeation for a non-property loss, what one should endeavor to do is to classify losses and ascertain a fixed sum for the specific damage. Thus, the doctrine of “loss of inheritance” should be deserted and the doctrine of “damage of death and injury” be validated so as to enable farme to obtain the same compeation as that provided for non-farme, which is a proper way in legal theory to crack the hard nut of “similar lives but with different values. Key Words:death; compeation; path “生命权是宪法价值的基础和核心，集中体现了人的价值与尊严”［1］。作为基本人权的生命权对于任何人来说都是平等的。从法律层面上讲，法律应当对人的生命价值给予充分关注，在权利上给予充分保障，只有这样才能体现人与人的平等，体现法律的公平价值。然而，司法实践和现实生活中存在着大量的“同命不同价”现象，这反映出我国生命权立法在生命权的平等保护方面存在着不足。如何寻求新的理论支点，破解现行难题，成为当前立法、司法及学界不容回避的问题。 一、“同命不同价”：对死亡赔偿金的城乡差别标准的质疑 “同命不同价”问题的讨论，源于新闻媒体对某些交通事故损害赔偿案件的报道。2005年12月15日，3名女生在重庆