美國法上大規模瑕疵產品的多重懲罰性賠償金責任研究

A Study on Liability of Multiple Punitive Damages of Mass Defect Products under U.S. Laws

戴志傑(Chih-Chieh Tai)

《輔仁法學》 50期 (2015/12) Pp. 165-256

摘要

60年代晚期產品責任制度的確立，促使了懲罰性賠償金法制的日漸發展。然因90年代初期後偶有出現鉅額裁決而引起爭論，故即觸發論者紛紛投入研究，且聯邦最高法院此際亦開始表示關切並對數起鉅額裁決案件予以司法審查。此外，隨著90年代侵權行為改革法案的進行，各州亦藉機而對該賠償金制度作出限制性的立法規範。然在此些司法審查與立法改革的作為與方案中，卻無對於大規模瑕疵產品致害事件面臨多重裁決所生過度扼殺與公平性等問題，提出具體的立法解決方案。而儘管各州法院對於此等重要問題已有所關切並提出看法，但最後均是陳言無能為力並表示唯有透過全國性立法方能解決。從而，此議題於美國法上儼然是產品責任及懲罰性賠償金責任制度中最為重要的研究課題之一。因此，鑑於我國近年大量黑心產品致害事件頻傳，且適用消保法而課予多重懲罰性賠償金責任將是可期，輔以國內迄今對此重要問題仍未有研究性論文出現等情形下，本文即擬研究美國法上此等問題之相關判決及學者間的建議方案，以期作為我國司法實務及未來修法上之參考。

關鍵字

消費者保護法 ； 大規模侵權訴訟 ； 多重裁決 ； 產品責任訴訟 ； 集體訴訟 ； 正當程序條款 ； 一次性裁決

並列摘要

The establishment of product liability system in the late 60's promoted the gradual development of punitive damages system, and surprising award appeared in the early 90's, so scholars have written articles to criticize and research, and the Supreme Court has expressed concerns and started constitutional judicial review on several high punitive damages awards. In addition, with the progress of tort reform in 90 years, each state had also reformed punitive damages system and made restrictive legislative norms. However, if we carefully investigate the actions and programs of the judicial reviews and legislative reforms, there are no concrete solutions and legislation proposed for overkill, fairness concerns, or other serious problems caused by mass defect products for continual litigations and facing multiple punitive damages awards. For the issue of “multiple punitive damages study of mass defect products”, each state court has already concerned and put forward their views, but ultimately they still expressed that they had nothing to do but appealed for the solution of nation-wide legislation. Therefore, in the USA law, this issue has been one of the most important research topics for product liability and the liability system of punitive damages. However, for this emerging and serious problem, there are still no academic research papers in our country's law. In view of the harmful events of a large number of unsafe products in our country in recent years, multiple punitive damages on the application of consumer protection law has already been the matter can be expected. Therefore, through the related judgments of U.S. courts and scholars’ studies, I would like to use this thesis to reflect on the defects of the responsibility of multiple punitive damages and suggestion for amending the law about mass defect products in our country's law.

並列關鍵字

Consumer Protection Law ； Mass Tort Litigation ； MultiplePunitive Damages Verdict ； Products Liability Litigation ； Class Action ； Due Process Clause ； One-time Award

參考文獻

戴志傑(2015)。美國法上懲罰性賠償金數額分享制度之研究。政大法學評論。140

李志峰(2014)。論美國懲罰性賠償金倍數比例之趨勢：兼評我國之相關規範。世新法學。8(1)

詹森林(2010)。消保法懲罰性賠償金責任之過失應否限於重大過失？：臺灣高等法院高雄分院九十七年上字第八一號民事判決之評析。月旦裁判時報。4

王薇葦(2014)。論我國消費者保護法第51條過失之意義：從懲罰性賠償之特性出發(碩士論文)。中原大學財經法律研究所。

戴志傑(2007)。美國懲罰性賠償金制度之基礎問題研究(博士論文)。中正大學法律學系研究所。