惩罚性赔偿制度研究
摘要
本文系统论述了惩罚性赔偿法律制度的基础理论与实践的基本内容;深入研究分析了惩罚性赔偿制度的基本概念、特征、源流及产生的原因和条件;归纳、概括了惩罚性赔偿制度作为一项侵权损害责任法律制度的历史演变和发展趋势,分析了惩罚性赔偿制度对侵权违法行为的惩罚和遏制功能,对受害人的补偿和激励功能,论述了我国在市场经济条件下建构惩罚性赔偿制度的意义。通过归纳分析英美法系、大陆法系主要国家惩罚性赔偿制度立法、司法实践状况,进一步论证了在现代市场经济条件下,建立和完善惩罚性赔偿法律制度是一种世界趋势。运用历史研究、比较分析、案例分析和经济分析等研究方法,对惩罚性赔偿的适用条件和适用范围、惩罚性赔偿制度的价值范畴和价值基础进行研究,重点分析了惩罚性赔偿的秩序、公平、平等、效率基本价值内容,概括了对两大法系主要国家惩罚性赔偿制度考察内容及启示,对我国《消费者权益保护法》、《食品安全法》、《侵权责任法》等有关惩罚性赔偿制度的立法、司法解释规定进行适用分析,并提出了需要完善建议的内容。
Punitive damages play a significant role in legal system of compensation for tort in China, which is extremely meaningful to our economic, social development and people's lives. In this paper, the author from a broader perspective, made a study of the punitive damages. This paper consists of three parts, respectively are introduction, thesis, body and conclusion. The paper text is divided into four chapters.
The main parts are as follows:
The first chapter is about the basis for punitive damages theory. This chapter, based on the legislation, doctrine and judicial practice of punitive damages in common law and civil law, made a study on theoretical issues of punitive damages, by using of comparative analysis, historical analysis and other methods. This chapter mainly studied the concept, the characteristics of punitive damages and the relationship between punitive damages and other related legal systems. The concept of punitive damages in common law theory has undergone a period of confusion on punitive damages, by using a series of terms, including Punitory, Imaginary, Speculative Presumptive, Added Damages, until today, Punitive Damages or Exemplary Damages is stationary used, when the defendant caused damage to the plaintiff in a malicious, intentional, fraudulent, or laissez-faire manner, the plaintiff can obtain the addition damages excluding the actual damages (Actual Damages), the purpose is to punish the defendant, in order to prevent its repeat the implementation of its malicious behavior, and to provide warning to others and to protect of public safety; As to characteristics of punitive damages, the author summarized it as punitive, incidental and legal nature of the three characteristics; then the author made a comparative analysis on punitive damages and compensatory damages, mental damages, criminal fines, administrative fines and penalties for breach of contract payment, distinguished the links between them and the nature of differences, and further demonstrated the legal nature of punitive damages.
The second chapter is about the value of punitive damages based on the scope and value basis. This chapter mainly discusses the meaning, content, basic categories, value structure of punitive damages, by means of analyzing the concept, the substance of punitive damages and the value principle of the punitive damages including the order value, fair value, equal value and efficiency value, then also discussed the value of punitive damages; The author made analysis on the legitimacy of punitive damages by using the theory of utilitarianism and retribution, and also discussed the reasonableness of damages disputes from the perspective of the theory of sociology of religion and economics. The author further demonstrated the value basis of the punitive damages by making a discussion of functions of the punitive damages including functions of punishment, compensation, deterrence and encouragement.
The third chapter is about the punitive damages in major countries of two legal systems and its implications. The first part of this chapter is the study of punitive damages in major countries of common law system, which conducted a comprehensive analysis on the development of punitive damages in Britain, systematically discussed , the challenged query, restrictions, the development process of punitive damages in Britain , and also made an analysis of the composition elements of punitive damages in Britain; Then the author studied on the punitive damages in United States, discussing a series of issues including the development of law, build path, components, determination the amount of compensation and dispute of punitive damages, and reform and practice of punitive damages in each State of U.S; Finally the author discussed punitive damages in Australia.
The second part in this chapter is about the punitive damages in major countries of civil law system. The author made an analysis on the punitive damages in civil law system, by focusing on the legislation, doctrine, jurisprudence and recognition and enforcement of the ruling from courts in common law. German scholars and the courts in punitive damages mostly had negative attitude to the punitive damages; while the majority of Japanese academics and scholars are in favor of punitive damages, because they viewed that it will strengthen its sanctions function against Japanese tort liability. As to the recognition and enforcement of judgement of punitive damages by a court in common law system, Germany, Japan and Switzer don’t refuse to recognition and enforcement of all judgments only due to these countries do not have a system of punitive damages, but to take a policy that trial differently and discriminately, recognition and enforcement with conditions.
The third part of this chapter is about the implication of punitive damages under the two Legal systems. This part, based on the study of punitive damages in two legal systems, summed up the implications in the process of construction the punitive damages, including (1) punitive damages has been basically established in the world, which symbolized that the legitimacy and reasonableness of punitive damages has been widely recognized, and whether to abolish the system of punitive damages is not the main issue of today; (2) punitive damages system is portable, but should be combined with the actual situation for localization transformation; (3) East-West cultural differences on punitive damages have a significant impact; (4) legislative, judicial application of punitive damages should be cautious; (5) the value goal of punitive damages is to achieve real justice, and to safeguard the legitimate rights of the weak.
The fourth chapter is about the legislative, judicial analysis and improvement of punitive damages in China. The first part of this chapter discussed punitive damages in Taiwan, China. Taiwan is a typical civil law legislative model, but successfully transplanted common law punitive damages regime in a wide range, and make it localization. The second part focused on analysis of the legislative status of punitive damages in China. China has determined the punitive damages in the "Consumer Protection Law," "Food Safety Law", "Tort Liability Act", and other laws, , but this system is not perfect. This part made an analysis on of legislation, application of the existing punitive damages, and discussed the significance of punitive damages in legislation and some issues arising from the system. The third part is about of the legislation improvements of punitive damages system in China. The author viewed that the Chinese legislative model of punitive damages, shall take the combination of unification and separation of the legislative model, which includes general provisions of punitive damages in the Civil Code and further specific provisions in each law department according to particularity and circumstances. China shall expand the application scope of punitive damages, for instance, punitive damages shall be introduced to environmental tort. The author made a discussion on issues such as China's punitive damages system elements, the amount of compensation and the compensation.
Punitive damages play a significant role in legal system of compensation for tort in China, which is extremely meaningful to our economic, social development and people's lives. In this paper, the author from a broader perspective, made a study of the punitive damages. This paper consists of three parts, respectively are introduction, thesis, body and conclusion. The paper text is divided into four chapters.
The main parts are as follows:
The first chapter is about the basis for punitive damages theory. This chapter, based on the legislation, doctrine and judicial practice of punitive damages in common law and civil law, made a study on theoretical issues of punitive damages, by using of comparative analysis, historical analysis and other methods. This chapter mainly studied the concept, the characteristics of punitive damages and the relationship between punitive damages and other related legal systems. The concept of punitive damages in common law theory has undergone a period of confusion on punitive damages, by using a series of terms, including Punitory, Imaginary, Speculative Presumptive, Added Damages, until today, Punitive Damages or Exemplary Damages is stationary used, when the defendant caused damage to the plaintiff in a malicious, intentional, fraudulent, or laissez-faire manner, the plaintiff can obtain the addition damages excluding the actual damages (Actual Damages), the purpose is to punish the defendant, in order to prevent its repeat the implementation of its malicious behavior, and to provide warning to others and to protect of public safety; As to characteristics of punitive damages, the author summarized it as punitive, incidental and legal nature of the three characteristics; then the author made a comparative analysis on punitive damages and compensatory damages, mental damages, criminal fines, administrative fines and penalties for breach of contract payment, distinguished the links between them and the nature of differences, and further demonstrated the legal nature of punitive damages.
The second chapter is about the value of punitive damages based on the scope and value basis. This chapter mainly discusses the meaning, content, basic categories, value structure of punitive damages, by means of analyzing the concept, the substance of punitive damages and the value principle of the punitive damages including the order value, fair value, equal value and efficiency value, then also discussed the value of punitive damages; The author made analysis on the legitimacy of punitive damages by using the theory of utilitarianism and retribution, and also discussed the reasonableness of damages disputes from the perspective of the theory of sociology of religion and economics. The author further demonstrated the value basis of the punitive damages by making a discussion of functions of the punitive damages including functions of punishment, compensation, deterrence and encouragement.
The third chapter is about the punitive damages in major countries of two legal systems and its implications. The first part of this chapter is the study of punitive damages in major countries of common law system, which conducted a comprehensive analysis on the development of punitive damages in Britain, systematically discussed , the challenged query, restrictions, the development process of punitive damages in Britain , and also made an analysis of the composition elements of punitive damages in Britain; Then the author studied on the punitive damages in United States, discussing a series of issues including the development of law, build path, components, determination the amount of compensation and dispute of punitive damages, and reform and practice of punitive damages in each State of U.S; Finally the author discussed punitive damages in Australia.
The second part in this chapter is about the punitive damages in major countries of civil law system. The author made an analysis on the punitive damages in civil law system, by focusing on the legislation, doctrine, jurisprudence and recognition and enforcement of the ruling from courts in common law. German scholars and the courts in punitive damages mostly had negative attitude to the punitive damages; while the majority of Japanese academics and scholars are in favor of punitive damages, because they viewed that it will strengthen its sanctions function against Japanese tort liability. As to the recognition and enforcement of judgement of punitive damages by a court in common law system, Germany, Japan and Switzer don’t refuse to recognition and enforcement of all judgments only due to these countries do not have a system of punitive damages, but to take a policy that trial differently and discriminately, recognition and enforcement with conditions.
The third part of this chapter is about the implication of punitive damages under the two Legal systems. This part, based on the study of punitive damages in two legal systems, summed up the implications in the process of construction the punitive damages, including (1) punitive damages has been basically established in the world, which symbolized that the legitimacy and reasonableness of punitive damages has been widely recognized, and whether to abolish the system of punitive damages is not the main issue of today; (2) punitive damages system is portable, but should be combined with the actual situation for localization transformation; (3) East-West cultural differences on punitive damages have a significant impact; (4) legislative, judicial application of punitive damages should be cautious; (5) the value goal of punitive damages is to achieve real justice, and to safeguard the legitimate rights of the weak.
The fourth chapter is about the legislative, judicial analysis and improvement of punitive damages in China. The first part of this chapter discussed punitive damages in Taiwan, China. Taiwan is a typical civil law legislative model, but successfully transplanted common law punitive damages regime in a wide range, and make it localization. The second part focused on analysis of the legislative status of punitive damages in China. China has determined the punitive damages in the "Consumer Protection Law," "Food Safety Law", "Tort Liability Act", and other laws, , but this system is not perfect. This part made an analysis on of legislation, application of the existing punitive damages, and discussed the significance of punitive damages in legislation and some issues arising from the system. The third part is about of the legislation improvements of punitive damages system in China. The author viewed that the Chinese legislative model of punitive damages, shall take the combination of unification and separation of the legislative model, which includes general provisions of punitive damages in the Civil Code and further specific provisions in each law department according to particularity and circumstances. China shall expand the application scope of punitive damages, for instance, punitive damages shall be introduced to environmental tort. The author made a discussion on issues such as China's punitive damages system elements, the amount of compensation and the compensation.
引文
①国家工商行政管理局条法司:《消费者权益保护法释义》,长春出版社1993年版,第117-118页。
①[美]E﹒博登海默:《法理学:法律哲学与法律方法》,邓正来译,中国政法大学出版社1999年版,第486页。
②转引自林德瑞:《论惩罚性赔偿》,《中正大学法学集刊》1998年第1期,第30页。1.Fay v. Parker 53N. H. 342 (1872). From, www. lexisnexis. com. 2. See Leslie E. John, Comment:Formulating Standards for Awards of Punitive Damages in the Borderland of Contract and Tort, California Law Review74(1986), pp. 2033-2040, note45. (the term“smart money”was coindin Fay v. Parkey to refer to compensation for the indignity and suffering sustained by the plaintiff at the hands of the defendant…not damages that would make the defendant “smart”in punishment for his offensive conduct.). 3.See Steven R. Salbu, Developing Rational Punitive Damages Policies: Beyond The Constitution, Florida Law Review49(1997) , pp. 247-271. (In 1872,the New Hampshire Supreme court validated the award of“smart money”meant to cover any blemish which remains after the first smart or pain is over.). 4.See Theodere Emens Cowen, Comment:Zen and the Art of Exemplary Damages Assessment, Kentucky Law Review72(1984), pp. 897-902,note31.(In being treated as synononous with “Exemplary Damages”,“Smart Money”was eventually constructed to refer to the“smarting”caused to defendant by the damages award .).
①潘修平等:《债权法:原理·规则·案例》,清华大学出版社2006年版,第95-96页
①Garner , B. A. (ed.) Black’s Law Dictionary, West Group, 7th 1999,P. 396. ( Damages awarded in addition to actual damages when the defendant acted with recklessness, malice, or deceit, Punitive damages,which are intended to punish and thereby deter blame worthy conduct, are generally not recoverable for breach of contract.)
②Model Punitive Damages Act§1(2)(1996).“Punitive damages”means an award of money made to a claimant solely to punish or deter.
③Restatement (Second) of Tort§908 (1977). (1)Punitive damages are damages, other than compensatory or norminal damages, awarded against a person to punish him for his outrageous conduct and to deter him and others like him from similar conduct in the future . (2)Punitive damages may be awarded for conduct that is outrageous, because of the defendant’s evil motive or his reckless indifference to the rights of others .In assessing punitive damages ,the trier of fact can properly consider the character of the defendant’s act , the nature and extent of the harm to the plaintiff that the defendant caused or intended to cause and the wealth of the defendant.
④王雪琴:《惩罚性损害赔偿制度研究》,载梁慧星主编《民商法论丛》(第20卷),香港金桥文化出版有限公司2001年版,第108页。
①王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国社会科学》2000年第4期,第112页。
②张新宝、李倩:《惩罚性赔偿的立法选择》,《清华法学》2009年第4期,第6页。
③王卫国:《中国消费者保护法上的欺诈行为与惩罚性赔偿》,《法学》1998年第3期,第25页。
④梁慧星主编:《民商法论丛》(第15卷),法律出版社2000年7月版,第64页。
⑤郭玉军:《国际商事仲裁中的惩罚性赔偿裁决》,《法学评论》2002年第1期,第116页。
⑥张新宝:《侵权责任法原理》,中国人民大学出版社2005年版第469-470页。
①王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国社会科学》2000年第4期,第113页。
①王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国社会科学》2000年第4期,第115页。
①赵汀阳:《论可能生活》,上海三联书店1994年版,第130页
②ALI, Restatement of the Law, Second, Torts,§908, comment c.
①温世扬、廖焕国著:《物权法定论》,人民法院出版社2005年版,第76页。
①李建华等:《民法总论》,科学出版社2007年版,第220页。
①陈聪富:《侵权归责原则与损害赔偿》,北京大学出版社2005年版,第235-236页。
②王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国社会科学》2000年第4期,第114页。
①汪治平:《人身损害赔偿若干问题研究》,中国法制出版社2001年版,第117页。
①郑玉波:《民法债编总论》,中国政法大学2004年版,第341页。
②崔建远主编:《民法9人行》(第2卷),金桥文化出版(香港)有限公司2004年版,第118页。
③郑宁、余华:《论侵犯商业秘密的惩罚性赔偿之建立》,和田师范专科学校学报2006第1期,第3页。
①王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国社会科学》2000年第4期,第112页。
②高铭暄、马克昌主编:《刑法学》,中国法制出版社1999年版,第442页。
①杜齐才:《价值与价值观念》,广东人民出版社1987年版,第9页。
②《马克思恩格斯全集》(第26卷),人民出版社1964年版,第139、326页。
③[美]罗斯科·庞德:《通过法律的社会控制:法律的任务》,沈宗灵、董世忠译,商务印书馆1984年版,第55页。
①周世中:《法的合理性研究》,山东人民出版社2004年版,第23页。
②Bryan A. Garner , Black’s Law Dictionary, West publishing co. , 5th 1979,P. 1391. (Value. The utility of an object in satisfying, directly or indirectly, the needs or desires of human beings, called by economists“value in use”, or its worth consisting in the power of purchasing other objects, called“value in exchange”.)
①[美]E·博登海默:《法理学:法律哲学与法律方法》,邓正来译,中国政法大学出版社1999年版,第109页。
①王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国社会科学》2000年第4期,第114页。
②郑成良:《现代法理学》,吉林大学出版社1999年版,第175页。
③周世中、黄竹胜:《法的价值及其实现》,广西师范大学出版社1998年版,第143页。
①杨震:《法价值哲学导论》,中国社会科学出版社2004年版,第179页。
①[美]彼得·斯坦等:《西方社会的法律价值》,王献平译,中国人民大学出版社1998年版,第41页。
②陈颖洲、高仁宝:《惩罚性赔偿制度初探》,《法律适用》2001年第5期,第57页。
①[美]E·博登海默:《法理学:法律哲学与法律方法》,邓正来译,中国政法大学出版社1999年版,第285页。
①[美]罗尔斯:《正义论》,中国社会科学出版社1998年版,第326页。
②[美] E·博登海默:《法理学:法律哲学与法律方法》,邓正来译,中国政法大学出版社1999年版,第199页。
③卓泽渊:《法的价值论》(第二版),法律出版社2006年版,第306-307页。
①江平主编:《中华人民共和国合同法精解》,中国政法大学出版社1999年版,第6页。
②王利明:《民法总则研究》,中国人民大学出版社2003年版,第115页。
①王利明:《民法总则研究》,中国人民大学出版社2003年版,第116页。
①谢鹏程:《基本法律价值》,山东人民出版社2000年版,第149页。
①转引自王立峰:《惩罚的哲理》,清华大学出版社2006年版,第35页。
①John Rawls, Two Concepts of Rules, The Philosophical Review 64(1955), pp. 3-32.
②John Rawls, Two Concepts of Rules, The Philosophical Review64(1955), pp. 3-32.
①[德]黑格尔:《法哲学原理》,范杨等译,商务印书馆1979年版,第254页。
②吕世伦、周世中:《论法治的合理性》,《当代法学》1998年第2期,第17页。
①吕世伦、周世中:《论法治的合理性》,《当代法学》1998年第2期,第19页。
①Bruce Chapmanm , Michael Tebilcock , Punitive Ddamages: Divergence in Searche of Rationale , Alabama Law Review40(1989) , p. 741.
②David G. Owen , Punitive Damages in Products Liability Litigation , Michigan Law Review74(1976) , pp.1257-1287.
③Dorsev D. Ellis Jr. , Fairness and Efficiency in the Law of Punitive Damages , Southern California Law Review56(1989) , p. 3.
④王利明:《美国惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,《比较法研究》2003年第5期,第3-4页。
①王雪琴:《惩罚性损害赔偿制度研究》,载梁慧星主编《民商法论丛》(第20卷),香港金桥文化出版有限公司2001年版,第130页。
②陈聪富:《侵权归责原则与损害赔偿》,北京大学出版社2005年版,第213页。
①Harold See, Punitive Damages: A Supporting Theory, Ala.L.Rev40(1989), p.1227.
②王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国社会科学》2000年第4期,第116页。
③Rebecce Dresser, Personal Identity and Punishment, B. U. Rev. 70(1990), p. 395-419.
①Oliver Wendell Holmes, JR. , the Common Law. West Publishing Co.,5th edition , p. 1. (In order to know what it is ,we must know what it has been , and what it tends to become .)
②[美]E·博登海默:《法理学:法律哲学与法律方法》,邓正来译,中国政法大学出版社1999年版,第147页。
①See Michael Rustad , Thomas Koening, The Historica Continuity of Punitive Damages Awards: Reforming the Tort Reformers ,American University Law Review (summer,1993) , pp. 1269-1287.
②See Michael Rustad , Thomas Koening ,The Historica Continuity of Punitive Damages Awards: Reforming the Tort Reformers, American University Law Review(summer,1993) , pp.1269-1288.
①Murphy v. Hobbs, 5P. 119 (colo.,1884).From:www.lexisnexis.com (last visited september 24th ,2009).
②周兆玉:《英美侵权法上惩罚性赔偿金制度》,载王军主编《侵权行为法比较研究》,法律出版社2006年版,第706页。
③Rookes v. Barnard, App.Cas.1129(1964). https://litigation-essentials.lexisnexis.com/webcd/app?action=DocumentDisplay&crawlid=1&doctype=cite&docid=54+Buffalo+L.+Rev.+1587&srctype=smi&srcid=3B15&key=c227cb2935386acd0147ae6fbba38014(last visited october 26th ,2009).
①Rookes v. Barnard, App, Cas. 1221(1964).
②Rookes v. Barnard, App, Cas. 1221,1226(1964).
①David F. Partlett, Punitive Damages:Legal Hot Zones, Louisiana Law Review(summer ,1996), pp. 781-787.
①See Cassell & Co.v.Broome. I All E.R.801,823(1972), (Lord Hailsham’s speech ).
①John Y. Gotanda, Punitive Damages: A Comparative Analysis,http://law.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article= 1008&context=villanovalwps.(last visited october 16th ,2009).
②Thompson ,[1998]Q. B.at 507.
①国家工商行政管理局条法司:《现代竞争法的理论与实践》,法律出版社1993年版,第292页。
②国家工商行政管理局条法司:《现代竞争法的理论与实践》,法律出版社1993年版,第293页。
③Genay v. Norris, 1S. C. L. 3, 1Bay 6(1784).
①Coryell v. Colbaugh, 1N.JL. 77(1784).
②Dorsey D.Ellis,Jr. , Fairness and Efficiency in the Law of Punitive Damages , Southern California Law Review5(1982), pp. 14-15.
③Day v. Woodworth, 54u, s, 363,370(1852).
④崔明峰、欧山:《英美法上惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,《河北法学》2000年第3期,第124页。
①David G. Owen, Puntitve Damages in Products Liability Litigation, Michigan Law Review74(1976), pp.1257-1263.
①Linda L.Schlueter, Punitive Damages ,5th edition, Matthew Bender&Company, Inc. 1998 , P. 27.
①陈聪富:《侵权归责原则与损害赔偿》,北京大学出版社2005年版,第222-223页。
①王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国法学》2000年第4期,第114页。
②Restatement of contract 2d, 355.
③王利明:《侵权行为法研究》(上卷),中国人民大学出版社2004年版,第659页。
①关淑芳:《惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,中国人民公安大学出版社2008年版,第113页。
①See Model Punitive Damages Act (1996),Section5. (The trier fact may award punitive damages against a defendant if the defendant has been found liable for a legally recognized injury which supports an award of punitive damages under the law of this State.)
①[美]肯尼斯·S·亚伯拉罕、阿尔伯特·C·泰特选编:《侵权法重述——纲要》,许传玺等译,法律出版社2006年版,第5页。
②王利明:《美国惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,《比较法研究》2003年第5期,第21页。
③[德]冯·巴尔:《欧洲比较侵权行为法》(下),焦美华译,法律出版社2004年版,第298-299页。
④[英]戴维·M·沃克:《经济法律大辞典》,中国财政经济出版社1992年版,第114页。
①王利明:《美国惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,《比较法研究》2003年第5期,第8页。
②王利明:《美国惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,《比较法研究》2003年第5期。第9页。
③徐爱国:《英美侵权行为法》,法律出版社1999年版,第178页。
①John J. Kircher & Christine M. Wiseman, Punitive Damages: Law and Practice, 2nd Edition, West Group2000, p. 8.
②See Model Punitive Damages Act (1996) , Section5.(The trier fact may award punitive damages against a defendant if an award is necessary to punish the defendant for the conduct or to deter the defendant from similar conduct in like circumstances.)
①See Mark Hart, The Constitutionality of Punitive Damages: Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Haslip, cumb. L.Rev 21 (1991), p. 585.
②陈聪富:《美国法上之惩罚性赔偿金》,《台湾本土法学》2001年第25期,第41页。
③Garnes v. Fleming Land-fill. Inc..413S.E.2d 897,899-900,908-10(W.Va.1991).
①116 S.Ct. 1589(1996), From:http://www.lexisnexis,com(last visited November 17th ,2009 )
②929 S.W.2d 326(Tenn., 1996). From:http://www.lexisnexis.com( last visited November 9th ,2009).
①谢哲胜:《财产法专题研究》(二),中国人民大学出版社2004年版,第17页。
①王利明:《美国惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,《比较法研究》2003年第5期,第11页。
②Michael Rustad, Thomas Koenig, The Historical Continuity of Punitive Damages Awards:Reforming The Tort Reformers, American University Law Review(Summer,1993). note 156 , pp. 1296-1032.
①Michael Rustad, Thomas Koenig, The Historical Continuity of Punitive Damages Awards:Reforming The Tort Reformers, American University Law Review(Summer,1993), pp.1296-1299.
②Michael Rustad, Thomas Koenig, The Historical Continuity of Punitive Damages Awards:Reforming the Tort Reformers, American University Law Review(Summer,1993). note 151, pp. 1296-1300.
③陈聪富等:《美国惩罚性赔偿金的发展趋势:改革运动与实证研究的对峙》,《法学丛刊》1998年第169期,第99页。
④Stephen Daniels& Joanne Martin, Myth and Reality in Punitive Damages, Minn, L. Rev. 75(1990) , p. 23.
①Victor E. Schwartz, Mark A.Behrens, Punitive Damgaes Reform: State Legislatures Can and Should Meet the Challenge Issued by the Supreme Court of the United Stated in Haslip, American University Law Review42(1993) , pp. 1365-1371.
②Steven R. Salbu, Developing Rational Punitive Damages Policies: Beyond the Constitution, Florida Law Review49(1997) , pp. 247-252.
③James B. Sales and Kenneth B,Cole,Jr., Punitive Damages: A Relic That Has Outlived Its Origins, Vanderbilt Law Review37 (1984) , pp.1117-1148.
④Kimberly A. Pace, The Tax Deductibility of Punitive DamagePayments: Who Should Ultimately Bear the Burden for Corporate Misconduct? Alabama Law Review 47(1996), pp. 825-843.
①Cass R.Sunstein,Deniel Kahneman and David Schkade, Assessing Punitive Damages (with Notes on Cognition and Jaluation in Law ), Vol 107,Yal ,L. 4(1998), p. 2094.
②U.S.Constitution Amendment 5.“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime ,unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arisin in the land or naval forces ,or in the Militia , when in a actual service in time of War or public danger ,nor shall bei compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself ,nor be deprived of life, liberty ,or property, without due process of law;nor shall private property be taken for public use ,without just compensation.”
③See James D.Ghiardi , John J.Kircher, supra note 48, at Chap.3, p.3.
④See James D.Ghiardi , John J.Kircher, supra note 48, at Chap.3, p. 2.
⑤Hansen v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. , 734 F2d 1036(CA5 1984), see Ghiardi and Kircher,supra note 53,at 4.
①U.S.Constitution Amendment 8, (Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.).
②Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc. , 492U.S.257(1989).
③Palmer v. A.H.Robins , CO. , 684 P.2d 187.
①U.S.Constitution Amendment 14, Section1.“All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall State deprive any person of life,liberty,or property, without due procwss of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
②See Linda L.Schlueter, Kenneth R.Redden, supra. note12, at 51-53 ; Robert E.Riggs, Constitutionalizing punitive Damages:The Limits of Due process, Ohio St.L.J 52(1991), pp. 859-869.
①王立峰:《论惩罚性赔偿》,载梁慧星主编《民商法论丛》(第15卷),法律出版社2007年版,第59页。
②BMW of North American Inc. v. Gore 116 S.Ct. 1589(1996).
①陈卫佐译:《德国民法典》,法律出版社2004年版,第75页。
②[德]迪特尔·梅迪库斯:《德国债法总论》,杜景林、卢谌译,法律出版社2004年版,第430页。
③陈卫佐:《德国民法典》,法律出版社2004年版,第265页
①河山:《论违约的惩罚性赔偿》,《中国工商管理研究》1996年第3期,第13页。
①杨栋:《外国法院惩罚性赔偿判决的承认与执行》,《政治与法律》1998年第5期,第41页。
①于敏:《日本侵权行为法》,法律出版社1998年版,第47页。
②[日]浦川道太郎:《日本法的惩罚性损害赔偿与制裁性慰谢金》,《法学家》2001年第5期,第118页。
③本节国外法规参见黄鸿图:《惩罚性损害赔偿制度之研究》,中国政法大学2001年博士学位论文,第79页。
①杨栋:《外国法院惩罚性赔偿判决的承认与执行》,《政治与法律》1998年第5期,第41页。
①杨栋:《外国法院惩罚性赔偿判决的承认与执行》,《政治与法律》1998年第5期,第41页。
②Day v. Woodsworth, http://supreme.justia.com/us/54/363/case.html. ( last visited November 9th ,2009).
①王文杰:《论我国民法移植的问题》,《法制与社会》2009年第7期,第14-15页。
①我国台湾地区《公平交易法》第三十二条规定了惩罚性赔偿条款,其立法目的是威慑侵权行为:“由于受害人常因损害额不大或甚难证明实际之损害范围,致不愿或不能向侵害人请求损害赔偿,此种情形将造成对不法侵害行为之纵容或鼓励。”
①郑杭生:《中国人民大学社会发展研究报告》,中国人民大学出版社2003年版,第86页。
②李凝:《社会弱势群体及其法律保护》,东南大学2006年硕士学位论文,第25-26页。
①我国台湾地区法规参见谢哲胜:《财产法专题研究》(二),中国人民大学出版社2004年版,第27-30页。
②《健康食品管理法》,“北大法意”, http://www.lawyee.net/Act/Act_Other_TW_Display.asp?ChannelID =1040000&KeyWord=&RID=6676,2009年5月4日。
①参见国家工商行政管理局条法司:《消费者权益保护法释义》,长春出版社1993年版,第117-118页。
①梁慧星:《消费者权益保护第四十九条的解释适用》,载梁慧星主编《民商法论丛》(第20卷),香港金桥文化出版有限公司2001年版,第400-406页。
①牟瑞瑾:《消费者权益保护法第四十九条的适用条件》,载梁慧星主编《民商法论丛》(第15卷),法律出版社2000年版,第230页。
①王利明、崔建远:《合同法新论:总则》,中国政法大学出版社2000年修订版,第271页。
②史尚宽:《民法总论》,中国政法大学出版社2000年版,第381页。
①袁武强、张在范:《论我国食品安全领域惩罚性赔偿责任制度的重构》,《行政与法》2009年第1期,第73页。
①高静、王芳:《论食品安全法中的惩罚性赔偿责任》,《广西政法管理干部学院学报》2009年第4期,第104页。
②高静、王芳:《论食品安全法中的惩罚性赔偿责任》,《广西政法管理干部学院学报》2009年第4期,第105页。
①王利明:《中华人民共和国侵权责任法释义》,中国法制出版社2010年版,第231页。
①台湾《民事诉讼法》第四十四条之一规定:多数有共同利益之人为同一公益社团法人之社员者,于章程所定目的范围内,得选定该法人为选定人起诉。法人依前项规定为社员提起金钱赔偿损害之诉时,如选定人全体以书状表明愿由法院判定被告应给付选定人之总额,并就给付总额之分配方法达成协议者,法院得不分别认定被告应给付各选定人之数额,而仅就被告应给付选定人全体之总额为裁判。
②请求之主体,除受害之消费者外,第三人可否请求?台湾板桥地方法院于89年度重诉字第65号博士的家判决中,持肯定意见,理由如下:一、参照消费者保护法第7条第3项之规定,企业经营者于违反合同第1、2项之规定致生损害于消费者或第三人时,该企业经营者对第三人亦应负连带赔偿责任;二、惩罚性赔偿金制度既在惩罚和嚇阻,自无将因企业经营者之鲁莽不顾公共安全致受有损害之第三人亦得类推适用本条之规定请求惩罚性赔偿金,较符立法目的。黄立:《板桥法院89年度重诉字第65号博士的家判决评析》,《月旦法学杂志》2003年第95期,第228页。
①金福海:《惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,法律出版社2008年版,第180页。
①金福海:《惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,法律出版社2008年版,第181页。
②李建华等:《民法总论》,科学出版社2007年版,第220页。
①释明权:“百度百科”,http://baike.baidu.com/view/36540.htm?fr=ala0_1_1,2010年4月13日。
①魏振瀛:《民法》(第三版),北京大学出版社、高等教育出版社2007年版,第688页。
②程啸:《侵权行为法总论》,人民大学出版社2008年版,第338页。
①张明楷:《刑法学》,法律出版社2003年版,第224页。(张明楷教授指出:直接故意与间接故意虽然存在区别,但二者在法律上的地位却是相同的。)
②魏振瀛:《民法》(第三版),北京大学出版社、高等教育出版社2007年版,第689页。
③汪泽:《民法上的善意、恶意及其适用》,《河北法学》1996年第1期,第10页。
④张新宝:《中国民法典·侵权行为法编草案建议稿》,http://www.civillaw.com.cn/qqf/weizhang.asp?id=11017,2010年4月12日。
①王利明:《侵权行为法研究》(上卷),中国人民大学出版社2004年版,第349页。
②史尚宽:《债法总论》,中国政法大学出版社2000年版,第111页。
①魏振瀛主编:《民法》,北京大学出版社2007年版,第684页。
②程啸:《侵权行为法总论》,中国人民大学出版社2008年版,第99页。
①陈聪富:《因果关系与损害赔偿》,北京大学出版社2006年版,第156页。
①崔明峰、河山:《英美法上惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,《河北法学》2000年第3期,第126页。
①中国民法典草案立法研究课题组:《中国民法典草案建议稿》,法律出版社2003年版第325页。
②王利明主编:《中国民法典草案建议稿及说明》,中国法制出版社2004年版,第253页。
③徐国栋主编:《绿色民法典草案》,社会科学文献出版社2004年版,第725页。
④张新宝:《中国民法典·侵权行为编草案建议稿》,“中国民商法律网”, http://www.civilaw.com.cn/articla /default.asp?id=11017,2009年1月28日。
①张新宝:《中国民法典·侵权行为编草案建议稿》,“中国民商法律网”, http://www.civilaw.com.cn/articla /default.asp?id=11017,2009年1月28日。
①[英]梅因:《古代法》,沈景一译,商务印书馆1997年版,第15页。
[1]李建华,蔡立东.民法总论[M].北京:科学出版社,2007.
[2]张文显.法哲学范畴研究[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001.
[3]王利明.侵权行为法归责原则研究[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.
[4]陈聪富.侵权归责原则与损害赔偿[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
[5]程啸.侵权行为法总论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2008.
[6]曾隆兴.详解损害赔偿法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.
[7]于敏.日本侵权行为法[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[8]董安生.民事法律行为[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2002.
[9]李响编.美国侵权法原理及案例研究[C].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.
[10]林诚二.民法总则(上、下)[M].北京:法律出版社,2008.
[11]王利明.民法总则研究[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2003.
[12]徐爱国.英美侵权行为法学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
[13]王利明.侵权行为法研究[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004.
[14]崔建远.合同法总论(上卷)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2008.
[15]韩世远.合同法总论[M].北京:法律出版社,2008.
[16]何主宇编著.英美法案例研读全程指南[C].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[17]韩世远,[日]下森定主编.履行障碍法研究[C].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[18]韩世远.履行障碍法的体系[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[19]夏芸.医疗事故赔偿法——来自日本法的启示[M].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[20]林诚二.民法问题与实例分析[M].北京:法律出版社,2008.
[21]胡雪梅.英国侵权法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2008.
[22]徐爱国等编译.哈佛法学评论——侵权法学精粹[C].北京:法律出版社,2005.
[23]崔建远.合同法(第4版)[M].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[24]陈朝璧.罗马法原理[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[25]王立峰.惩罚的哲理[M].北京:清华大学出版社,2006.
[26]王卫国.过错责任原则——第三次勃兴[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2000.
[27]张新宝.侵权责任法原理[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2005.
[28]邱聪智.从侵权行为归责原理之变动论危险责任之构成[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006.
[29]陈聪富.侵权归责原则与损害赔偿[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
[30]杨立新.人身权法论[M].北京:中国检察出版社,1996.
[31]赵汀阳.论可能生活[M].上海:三联书店,1994.
[32]张宏生主编.西方法律思想史[C].北京:北京大学出版社,1983.
[33]杨立新.侵权法论[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2005.
[34]王泽鉴.侵权行为法(1)[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001.
[35]于敏.日本侵权行为法[M].北京:法律出版社,1998.
[36]郭明瑞,房绍坤,於向平.民事责任论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1991.
[37]张民安.现代法国侵权责任制度研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[38]王利明.违约责任论[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000.
[39]王军.侵权行为法比较研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[40]金瑞林.环境法学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1999.
[41]邱聪智.从侵权行为归责原理之变动论危险责任之构成[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006.
[42]王利明.合同法新问题研究[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2003.
[43]谢怀轼.合同法原理[M].北京:法律出版社,2000.
[44]刘杨.法律正当性观念的转变[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2003.
[45]胡平.精神损害赔偿制度研究[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2003.
[46]张新宝.侵权责任构成要件研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[47]梁慧星主编.民商法论丛(第15卷)[C].北京:法律出版社,2000.
[48]梁慧星主编.民商法论丛(第20卷)[C].北京:法律出版社,2001.
[49]谢哲胜.财产法专题研究(二)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004.
[50]刘士国.侵权责任法重大疑难问题研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2009.
[51]曾世雄.损害赔偿法原理[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001.
[52]张新宝.侵权责任法原理[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2005.
[53]温世扬,廖焕国.物权法定论[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2005.
[54]汪治平.人身损害赔偿若干问题研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2001.
[55]崔建远主编.民法9人行(第2卷)[C].香港:金桥文化出版有限公司,2004.
[56]高铭暄,马克昌主编.刑法学[M].北京:中国法制出版社,1999.
[57]杜齐才.价值与价值观念[M].广东:广东人民出版社,1987.
[58]周世中.法的合理性研究[M].山东:山东人民出版社,2004.
[59]郑成良.现代法理学[M].吉林:吉林大学出版社,1999.
[60]周世中,黄竹胜.法的价值及其实现[M].广西:广西师范大学出版社,1998 .
[61]杨震.法价值哲学导论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2004.
[62]卓泽渊.法的价值论(第二版)[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[63]江平主编.中华人民共和国合同法精解[C].北京:中国政法大学出版,1999.
[64]谢鹏程.基本法律价值[M].山东:山东人民出版社,2000 .
[65]关淑芳.惩罚性赔偿制度研究[M].北京:中国人民公安大学出版社,2008.
[66]沈宗灵.法理学[M].北京:高等教育出版社,1994.
[67]国家工商行政管理局条法司.消费者权益保护法释义[M].吉林:长春出版社,1993.
[68]王利明,崔建远.合同法新论总则[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000.
[69]史尚宽.民法总论[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000.
[70]中国民法典草案立法研究课题组.中国民法典草案建议稿[M].北京:法律出版社,2003.
[71]王利明.中国民法典草案建议稿及说明[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2004.
[72]徐国栋主编.绿色民法典草案[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2004.
[1] [意]毛罗·布撒尼,[美]弗农·瓦伦丁·帕尔默主编.欧洲法中的纯粹经济损失[M].张小义,钟洪明译.北京:法律出版社,2005.
[2] [美]詹姆斯·戈德雷.私法的基础:财产,侵权,合同和不当得利[M].张家勇译.北京:法律出版社,2007.
[3] [法]米歇尔·福柯.规训与惩罚[M].刘北成,杨远婴译.上海:三联书店,2003.
[4] [日]田中英夫,竹内昭夫.私人在法实现中的作用[M].李薇译.北京:法律出版社,2006.
[5] [德]克雷斯蒂安·冯·巴尔.欧洲比较侵权行为法(上)[M].张新宝译.北京:法律出版社,2004.
[6] [德]克雷斯蒂安·冯·巴尔.欧洲比较侵权行为法(下)[M].焦美华译.北京:法律出版社,2004.
[7] [德]马克西米利安·福克斯.侵权行为法[M].齐晓琨译.北京:法律出版社,2006.
[8] [美]文森特R.约翰逊.美国侵权法[M].赵秀文译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004.
[9] [德]克雷斯蒂安·冯·巴尔,乌里希·德罗布尼希主编.欧洲合同法与侵权法及财产法的互动[M].吴越,王洪等译.北京:法律出版社,2007.
[10] [美]罗尔斯.正义论[M].何怀宏等译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1998.
[11] [英]彼得·凯恩.阿蒂亚论事故、赔偿及法律(第六版)[M].王仰光,朱呈文等译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2008.
[12] [美]罗伯特·考特,托马斯·尤伦.法和经济学[M].张军译.上海:三联书店,上海人民出版社,1994.
[13] [美] E﹒博登海默.法理学——法律哲学与法律方法[M].邓正来译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999.
[14] [美]肯尼斯·S·亚伯拉罕,阿尔伯特·C·泰特选编.侵权法重述——纲要[M].许传玺,石宏等译.北京:法律出版社,2006.
[15] [美]理查德·A·波斯纳.法律的经济分析[M].蒋兆康,林毅夫译.北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1997.
[16] [英]梅因.古代法[M].沈景一译.北京:商务印书馆,1997.
[17] [美]彼得·斯坦,约翰·香德.西方社会的法律价值[M].王献平译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,1998.
[18] [德]德迪特尔·梅迪库斯.德国债法总论[M].杜景林,卢谌译.北京:法律出版社,2004.
[19] [美]科赛.社会冲突的功能[M].北京:华夏出版社,1988.
[20] [美]鲁道夫·冯·耶林.为权利而斗争[M].胡宝海译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999.
[21] [美]罗斯科·庞德.通过法律的社会控制——法律的任务[M].沈宗灵,董世忠译.北京:商务印书馆,2008.
[1]杨栋.外国法院惩罚性赔偿判决的承认与执行[J].山东法学,1998(5):39-43.
[2]杨福忠.试论法律规范的正当性[J].首都师范大学学报,2005(5):53-59.
[3]郭玉军.国际商事仲裁中的惩罚性赔偿裁决[J].法学评论,2002(1):116-122.
[4]符琪.简论惩罚性赔偿制度[J].河南大学学报(社会科学版),2001(3):43-46.
[5]吕世伦,周世中.论法治的合理性[J].当代法学1998(2):17-21.
[6]崔明峰,欧山.英美法上惩罚性赔偿制度研究[J].河北法学,2000(3):124-127.
[7]王利明.美国惩罚性赔偿制度研究[J].比较法研究,2003(5):1-12.
[8]熊进光.论惩罚性赔偿在合同领域适用的正当性[J].上海政法学院学报,2005(1):82-87.
[9]胡刚.论我国合同责任中惩罚性赔偿的适用[J].太原经济管理干部学院学报,2004(1):30-33.
[10]河山.论违约的惩罚性赔偿[J].中国工商管理研究,1996(3):12-14.
[11]王利明.惩罚性赔偿研究[J].中国法学,2000(4):112-122 .
[12]王立峰.论惩罚性损害赔偿[A].梁慧星主编.民商法论丛(第15卷)[C].北京:法律出版社,2000:54-113.
[13]王雪琴.惩罚性赔偿制度研究[A].梁慧星主编.民商法论丛(第20卷)[C].北京:法律出版社,2000:100-145.
[14]梁慧星.消费者权益保护第四十九条的解释适用[A].民商法论丛(第20卷)[C].香港:金桥文化出版有限公司,2001:400-406.
[15]董文军.论我国《消费者权益保护法》中的惩罚性赔偿[J].当代法学,2006(2):69-74.
[16]祁光明,张彦春.论惩罚性赔偿制度[J].内蒙古民族大学学报(社会科学版),2007(2):95-97.
[17]仇云霞,何维国.合同责任中惩罚性损害赔偿的适用[J].湖北社会科学,2002(2):50-52.
[18]朱凯.惩罚性赔偿在侵权法中的基础及其适用[J].中国法学,2003(3):86-93.
[19]郑宁,余华.论侵犯商业秘密的惩罚性赔偿之建立[J].和田师范专科学校学报,2006(1):3-5.
[20]金福海.论惩罚性赔偿责任的性质[J].法学评论,2004(3):59-63.
[21]徐海燕.我国导入惩罚性赔偿制度的法学思考[J].杭州师范学院学报(社会科学版),2004(2):99-104.
[22]陈颖洲,高仁宝.惩罚性赔偿制度初探[J].法律适用,2001(5):56-58.
[23]饶世权.论《消费者权益保护法》中惩罚性赔偿制度之完善[J].吉林大学社会科学学报,2000(6):88-91.
[24]叶彬琪.民法通则应增设惩罚性赔偿条款[J].人民司法,1994(10):32-33.
[25]王小红,钟海华.也谈民法中惩罚性赔偿责任——兼与叶彬琪同志商榷[J].人民司法,1995(3):29-30.
[26]王成.侵权损害赔偿计算的经济分析——以人身及精神损害赔偿为背景[J].比较法研究,2004(2):96-100.
[27]吕彦.关于过错的若干问题探讨[J].现代法学,1999(2):58-62.
[28]徐爱国.重新解释侵权行为法的公平责任原则[J].政治与法律,2003(6):33-44.
[29]汪泽.民法上的善意、恶意及其适用[J].河北法学,1996(1):7-12.
[30]刘士国.论无过错责任[J].法学研究,1994(5):37-42.
[31]董春华.美国产品责任法中的惩罚性赔偿[J].比较法研究,2008(5) :99-110.
[32]杨立新.对我国侵权责任法规定惩罚性赔偿金制裁恶意产品侵权行为探讨[J].中州法学,2009(2):67-72.
[33]张新宝,李倩.惩罚性赔偿的立法选择[J].清华法学,2009(4):5-20.
[34]杨立新.论埃塞俄比亚侵权行为法对中国侵权行为法的借鉴意义[J].扬州大学学报,2005(5):23-30.
[35]陈聪富.美国法上之惩罚性赔偿金的发展趋势:改革运动与实证研究的对峙[J].台大法学论丛, 1997(1):231-264.
[36]林德瑞.论惩罚性赔偿[J].中正大学法学集刊,1998(1):25-66.
[37]林德瑞.论惩罚性赔偿金可保性之法律争议[J].中正大学法学集刊,1999(2):103-129.
[38]何建志.惩罚性赔偿金之法理与应用——论最适赔偿金之判定[J].台大法学论丛,2002(3):237-289.
[1]陈春玲.论惩罚性赔偿金之法律争议与风险管理[D].台北:国立政治大学,2004.
[2]游成润.违反公平交易法之损害赔偿责任——以限制竞争法为中心[D].台北:国立政治大学,2003.
[3]郑巧筠.论侵害专利权之惩罚性赔偿[D].台北:国立台湾大学,2009.
[4]庄丽檬.论食品企业经营者的民事责任[D].台北:国立成功大学,2005.
[5]赵弥嘉.专利侵害惩罚性赔偿之主观要件——中美比较研究[D].台北:世新大学,2009.
[6]黄鸿图.惩罚性损害赔偿制度之研究——兼论两岸《消保法》之法制[D].北京:中国政法大学,2006.
[7]余艺.惩罚性赔偿研究[D].重庆:西南政法大学,2006.
[1] A. Mitchell Kolinsky, Steven Shovel. Punitive Damages : A Economic Analysis [J].Harvard Law Review, 1998, 111: 869-962.
[2] Andrew M. Kenewick. The Constitutionality of Punitive Damages: Under the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment [J]. Michigan Law Review, 1987, 85: 1699-1726.
[3] Peter Birks. Wrongs and Remedies in the Twenty-first Century [M]. London: Clarendon Press, 1996.
[4] Anthony Duggan. Exemplary Damages in Equity: A Law and Economics Perspective[J]. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 2006, 26: 303-326.
[5] Thomas B. Colby. Beyond the Multiple Punishment Problem: Punitive Damages as Punishment for Individual, Private Wrongs[J]. Minn. L. Rev., 2003, 87:583-678.
[6] Anthony J. Sebok. What did Punitive Damages Do? Why Misunderstanding the History of Punitive Damages Matters Today[J]. Chi-Kent L. Rev., 2003, 78: 163-206.
[7] Elliot Klayman, Seth Klayman. Punitive Damages: Toward Torah-Based Tort Reform[J]. Cardozo L. Rev., 2001, 23: 221-252.
[8] Fred W. Morgan, Karl A. Boedecker. Punitive Damages after BMW v. Gore[J]. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 1997, 16: 163-172.
[9] Gregory S. Pipe. Exemplary Damages After Camelford[J]. The Modern Law Review, 1994, 57: 91-101.
[10] Ernst C. Stiefel et al. The Enforceability of Excessive U. S. Punitive Damage Awards in Germany[J]. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 1991, 39: 779-802.
[11] R. W. Hodgin, E. Veitch. Punitive Damages: Reassessed[J]. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 1972, 21: 119-132.
[12] The Law Commission. Aggravated, Exemplary and Restitutionary Damages[EB/ OL]. [2009-09-12].http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/lc247.pdf.
[13] Punitive Damages Reform. [EB/OL]. [2009-09-14].http://www.atra. org/show/7343.
[14] David Friedman. An Economic Explanation of Punitive Damages[J/OL].[2009 -09-16].http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Punitive/Punitive.html.
[15] Supreme Court Tightens Limits On Punitive Damages. [J/OL].[2009-09-18]. http://www.goodwinprocter.com/~/media/51810653EE2542E6B0A845D9068D2DC0.ashx.
[16] Thomas H. Cohen. Punitive Damage Awards in Large Counties, 2001 [J/OL]. [2009-09-23]. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/pdalc01.pdf.
[17] Punitive damages Review 2006.[2009-09-124].http://www.travelers.com/ business/excessCasualty/docs/PunitiveDamages.pdf.
[18] J. Clark Kelso&Kari C. Kelso, Ph.D. An Analysis of Punitive Damages in CaliforniaCourts, 1991-2000[J/OL]. [2009-09-28].http://www.mcgeorge.edu/ documents/ centers/government/ccglp_pubs_punitive_damages_report.PDF.
[19] Jedediah wakefield, jennifer fraser parrish. California Supreme Court Clarifies Guidelines for Punitive Damages[J/OL]. [2009-10-09].http://www.fenwick.com/ docstore/Publications/Litigation/Litigation_Alert_07-05-05.pdf.
[20] John Y. Gotanda. Punitive Damages: A Comparative Analysis[J/OL]. [2009-10- 12]. ttp://law.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=Villano valwps.
[21] Francesco Quarta Recognition and Enforcement of U.S.Punitive Damages Awards in Continental Europe: The Italian Supreme Court’s Veto[J/OL].[2009-10-117] . http://ssrn.com/abstract=1182442.
[22] Ernest J. Weinrib. Restitutionary Damages as Corrective Justice[J/OL]. [2009 -10-21]. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1273346.
[23] Stephen J. Choi & Theodore Eisenberg. Punitive Damages in Securities Arbitration: An Empirical Study[J/OL]. [2009-10-22]. http://ssrn.com/abstract= 1322482.
[24] John Bronsteen, Christopher Buccafusco, and Jonathan Masur. Happiness and Punishment[J/OL]. [2009-10-29]. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1313360.
[25] Georges Cavalier Jean-Sébastien Quéguiner Punitive Damages and French Public Policy[J/OL]. [2009-11-03] http://ssrn.com/abstract=1174363
[26] Christopher J. Robinette. A Public Purpose for Punitive Damages? [J/OL]. [2009-09-12]. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1114091.
[27] Paulo Barrozo. Punishing Cruelly: Punishment, Cruelty, and Mercy[J/OL]. [2009-11-04]. Http://ssrn.com/abstract=1005550.
[28] Christopher R. Green The Food-Chain Issue for Corporate Punishment:What Criminal Law and Punitive Damages Can Learn from Each Other [J/OL]. [2009-11-06]. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1102754.
①[美]E﹒博登海默:《法理学:法律哲学与法律方法》,邓正来译,中国政法大学出版社1999年版,第486页。
②转引自林德瑞:《论惩罚性赔偿》,《中正大学法学集刊》1998年第1期,第30页。1.Fay v. Parker 53N. H. 342 (1872). From, www. lexisnexis. com. 2. See Leslie E. John, Comment:Formulating Standards for Awards of Punitive Damages in the Borderland of Contract and Tort, California Law Review74(1986), pp. 2033-2040, note45. (the term“smart money”was coindin Fay v. Parkey to refer to compensation for the indignity and suffering sustained by the plaintiff at the hands of the defendant…not damages that would make the defendant “smart”in punishment for his offensive conduct.). 3.See Steven R. Salbu, Developing Rational Punitive Damages Policies: Beyond The Constitution, Florida Law Review49(1997) , pp. 247-271. (In 1872,the New Hampshire Supreme court validated the award of“smart money”meant to cover any blemish which remains after the first smart or pain is over.). 4.See Theodere Emens Cowen, Comment:Zen and the Art of Exemplary Damages Assessment, Kentucky Law Review72(1984), pp. 897-902,note31.(In being treated as synononous with “Exemplary Damages”,“Smart Money”was eventually constructed to refer to the“smarting”caused to defendant by the damages award .).
①潘修平等:《债权法:原理·规则·案例》,清华大学出版社2006年版,第95-96页
①Garner , B. A. (ed.) Black’s Law Dictionary, West Group, 7th 1999,P. 396. ( Damages awarded in addition to actual damages when the defendant acted with recklessness, malice, or deceit, Punitive damages,which are intended to punish and thereby deter blame worthy conduct, are generally not recoverable for breach of contract.)
②Model Punitive Damages Act§1(2)(1996).“Punitive damages”means an award of money made to a claimant solely to punish or deter.
③Restatement (Second) of Tort§908 (1977). (1)Punitive damages are damages, other than compensatory or norminal damages, awarded against a person to punish him for his outrageous conduct and to deter him and others like him from similar conduct in the future . (2)Punitive damages may be awarded for conduct that is outrageous, because of the defendant’s evil motive or his reckless indifference to the rights of others .In assessing punitive damages ,the trier of fact can properly consider the character of the defendant’s act , the nature and extent of the harm to the plaintiff that the defendant caused or intended to cause and the wealth of the defendant.
④王雪琴:《惩罚性损害赔偿制度研究》,载梁慧星主编《民商法论丛》(第20卷),香港金桥文化出版有限公司2001年版,第108页。
①王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国社会科学》2000年第4期,第112页。
②张新宝、李倩:《惩罚性赔偿的立法选择》,《清华法学》2009年第4期,第6页。
③王卫国:《中国消费者保护法上的欺诈行为与惩罚性赔偿》,《法学》1998年第3期,第25页。
④梁慧星主编:《民商法论丛》(第15卷),法律出版社2000年7月版,第64页。
⑤郭玉军:《国际商事仲裁中的惩罚性赔偿裁决》,《法学评论》2002年第1期,第116页。
⑥张新宝:《侵权责任法原理》,中国人民大学出版社2005年版第469-470页。
①王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国社会科学》2000年第4期,第113页。
①王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国社会科学》2000年第4期,第115页。
①赵汀阳:《论可能生活》,上海三联书店1994年版,第130页
②ALI, Restatement of the Law, Second, Torts,§908, comment c.
①温世扬、廖焕国著:《物权法定论》,人民法院出版社2005年版,第76页。
①李建华等:《民法总论》,科学出版社2007年版,第220页。
①陈聪富:《侵权归责原则与损害赔偿》,北京大学出版社2005年版,第235-236页。
②王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国社会科学》2000年第4期,第114页。
①汪治平:《人身损害赔偿若干问题研究》,中国法制出版社2001年版,第117页。
①郑玉波:《民法债编总论》,中国政法大学2004年版,第341页。
②崔建远主编:《民法9人行》(第2卷),金桥文化出版(香港)有限公司2004年版,第118页。
③郑宁、余华:《论侵犯商业秘密的惩罚性赔偿之建立》,和田师范专科学校学报2006第1期,第3页。
①王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国社会科学》2000年第4期,第112页。
②高铭暄、马克昌主编:《刑法学》,中国法制出版社1999年版,第442页。
①杜齐才:《价值与价值观念》,广东人民出版社1987年版,第9页。
②《马克思恩格斯全集》(第26卷),人民出版社1964年版,第139、326页。
③[美]罗斯科·庞德:《通过法律的社会控制:法律的任务》,沈宗灵、董世忠译,商务印书馆1984年版,第55页。
①周世中:《法的合理性研究》,山东人民出版社2004年版,第23页。
②Bryan A. Garner , Black’s Law Dictionary, West publishing co. , 5th 1979,P. 1391. (Value. The utility of an object in satisfying, directly or indirectly, the needs or desires of human beings, called by economists“value in use”, or its worth consisting in the power of purchasing other objects, called“value in exchange”.)
①[美]E·博登海默:《法理学:法律哲学与法律方法》,邓正来译,中国政法大学出版社1999年版,第109页。
①王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国社会科学》2000年第4期,第114页。
②郑成良:《现代法理学》,吉林大学出版社1999年版,第175页。
③周世中、黄竹胜:《法的价值及其实现》,广西师范大学出版社1998年版,第143页。
①杨震:《法价值哲学导论》,中国社会科学出版社2004年版,第179页。
①[美]彼得·斯坦等:《西方社会的法律价值》,王献平译,中国人民大学出版社1998年版,第41页。
②陈颖洲、高仁宝:《惩罚性赔偿制度初探》,《法律适用》2001年第5期,第57页。
①[美]E·博登海默:《法理学:法律哲学与法律方法》,邓正来译,中国政法大学出版社1999年版,第285页。
①[美]罗尔斯:《正义论》,中国社会科学出版社1998年版,第326页。
②[美] E·博登海默:《法理学:法律哲学与法律方法》,邓正来译,中国政法大学出版社1999年版,第199页。
③卓泽渊:《法的价值论》(第二版),法律出版社2006年版,第306-307页。
①江平主编:《中华人民共和国合同法精解》,中国政法大学出版社1999年版,第6页。
②王利明:《民法总则研究》,中国人民大学出版社2003年版,第115页。
①王利明:《民法总则研究》,中国人民大学出版社2003年版,第116页。
①谢鹏程:《基本法律价值》,山东人民出版社2000年版,第149页。
①转引自王立峰:《惩罚的哲理》,清华大学出版社2006年版,第35页。
①John Rawls, Two Concepts of Rules, The Philosophical Review 64(1955), pp. 3-32.
②John Rawls, Two Concepts of Rules, The Philosophical Review64(1955), pp. 3-32.
①[德]黑格尔:《法哲学原理》,范杨等译,商务印书馆1979年版,第254页。
②吕世伦、周世中:《论法治的合理性》,《当代法学》1998年第2期,第17页。
①吕世伦、周世中:《论法治的合理性》,《当代法学》1998年第2期,第19页。
①Bruce Chapmanm , Michael Tebilcock , Punitive Ddamages: Divergence in Searche of Rationale , Alabama Law Review40(1989) , p. 741.
②David G. Owen , Punitive Damages in Products Liability Litigation , Michigan Law Review74(1976) , pp.1257-1287.
③Dorsev D. Ellis Jr. , Fairness and Efficiency in the Law of Punitive Damages , Southern California Law Review56(1989) , p. 3.
④王利明:《美国惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,《比较法研究》2003年第5期,第3-4页。
①王雪琴:《惩罚性损害赔偿制度研究》,载梁慧星主编《民商法论丛》(第20卷),香港金桥文化出版有限公司2001年版,第130页。
②陈聪富:《侵权归责原则与损害赔偿》,北京大学出版社2005年版,第213页。
①Harold See, Punitive Damages: A Supporting Theory, Ala.L.Rev40(1989), p.1227.
②王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国社会科学》2000年第4期,第116页。
③Rebecce Dresser, Personal Identity and Punishment, B. U. Rev. 70(1990), p. 395-419.
①Oliver Wendell Holmes, JR. , the Common Law. West Publishing Co.,5th edition , p. 1. (In order to know what it is ,we must know what it has been , and what it tends to become .)
②[美]E·博登海默:《法理学:法律哲学与法律方法》,邓正来译,中国政法大学出版社1999年版,第147页。
①See Michael Rustad , Thomas Koening, The Historica Continuity of Punitive Damages Awards: Reforming the Tort Reformers ,American University Law Review (summer,1993) , pp. 1269-1287.
②See Michael Rustad , Thomas Koening ,The Historica Continuity of Punitive Damages Awards: Reforming the Tort Reformers, American University Law Review(summer,1993) , pp.1269-1288.
①Murphy v. Hobbs, 5P. 119 (colo.,1884).From:www.lexisnexis.com (last visited september 24th ,2009).
②周兆玉:《英美侵权法上惩罚性赔偿金制度》,载王军主编《侵权行为法比较研究》,法律出版社2006年版,第706页。
③Rookes v. Barnard, App.Cas.1129(1964). https://litigation-essentials.lexisnexis.com/webcd/app?action=DocumentDisplay&crawlid=1&doctype=cite&docid=54+Buffalo+L.+Rev.+1587&srctype=smi&srcid=3B15&key=c227cb2935386acd0147ae6fbba38014(last visited october 26th ,2009).
①Rookes v. Barnard, App, Cas. 1221(1964).
②Rookes v. Barnard, App, Cas. 1221,1226(1964).
①David F. Partlett, Punitive Damages:Legal Hot Zones, Louisiana Law Review(summer ,1996), pp. 781-787.
①See Cassell & Co.v.Broome. I All E.R.801,823(1972), (Lord Hailsham’s speech ).
①John Y. Gotanda, Punitive Damages: A Comparative Analysis,http://law.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article= 1008&context=villanovalwps.(last visited october 16th ,2009).
②Thompson ,[1998]Q. B.at 507.
①国家工商行政管理局条法司:《现代竞争法的理论与实践》,法律出版社1993年版,第292页。
②国家工商行政管理局条法司:《现代竞争法的理论与实践》,法律出版社1993年版,第293页。
③Genay v. Norris, 1S. C. L. 3, 1Bay 6(1784).
①Coryell v. Colbaugh, 1N.JL. 77(1784).
②Dorsey D.Ellis,Jr. , Fairness and Efficiency in the Law of Punitive Damages , Southern California Law Review5(1982), pp. 14-15.
③Day v. Woodworth, 54u, s, 363,370(1852).
④崔明峰、欧山:《英美法上惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,《河北法学》2000年第3期,第124页。
①David G. Owen, Puntitve Damages in Products Liability Litigation, Michigan Law Review74(1976), pp.1257-1263.
①Linda L.Schlueter, Punitive Damages ,5th edition, Matthew Bender&Company, Inc. 1998 , P. 27.
①陈聪富:《侵权归责原则与损害赔偿》,北京大学出版社2005年版,第222-223页。
①王利明:《惩罚性赔偿研究》,《中国法学》2000年第4期,第114页。
②Restatement of contract 2d, 355.
③王利明:《侵权行为法研究》(上卷),中国人民大学出版社2004年版,第659页。
①关淑芳:《惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,中国人民公安大学出版社2008年版,第113页。
①See Model Punitive Damages Act (1996),Section5. (The trier fact may award punitive damages against a defendant if the defendant has been found liable for a legally recognized injury which supports an award of punitive damages under the law of this State.)
①[美]肯尼斯·S·亚伯拉罕、阿尔伯特·C·泰特选编:《侵权法重述——纲要》,许传玺等译,法律出版社2006年版,第5页。
②王利明:《美国惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,《比较法研究》2003年第5期,第21页。
③[德]冯·巴尔:《欧洲比较侵权行为法》(下),焦美华译,法律出版社2004年版,第298-299页。
④[英]戴维·M·沃克:《经济法律大辞典》,中国财政经济出版社1992年版,第114页。
①王利明:《美国惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,《比较法研究》2003年第5期,第8页。
②王利明:《美国惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,《比较法研究》2003年第5期。第9页。
③徐爱国:《英美侵权行为法》,法律出版社1999年版,第178页。
①John J. Kircher & Christine M. Wiseman, Punitive Damages: Law and Practice, 2nd Edition, West Group2000, p. 8.
②See Model Punitive Damages Act (1996) , Section5.(The trier fact may award punitive damages against a defendant if an award is necessary to punish the defendant for the conduct or to deter the defendant from similar conduct in like circumstances.)
①See Mark Hart, The Constitutionality of Punitive Damages: Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Haslip, cumb. L.Rev 21 (1991), p. 585.
②陈聪富:《美国法上之惩罚性赔偿金》,《台湾本土法学》2001年第25期,第41页。
③Garnes v. Fleming Land-fill. Inc..413S.E.2d 897,899-900,908-10(W.Va.1991).
①116 S.Ct. 1589(1996), From:http://www.lexisnexis,com(last visited November 17th ,2009 )
②929 S.W.2d 326(Tenn., 1996). From:http://www.lexisnexis.com( last visited November 9th ,2009).
①谢哲胜:《财产法专题研究》(二),中国人民大学出版社2004年版,第17页。
①王利明:《美国惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,《比较法研究》2003年第5期,第11页。
②Michael Rustad, Thomas Koenig, The Historical Continuity of Punitive Damages Awards:Reforming The Tort Reformers, American University Law Review(Summer,1993). note 156 , pp. 1296-1032.
①Michael Rustad, Thomas Koenig, The Historical Continuity of Punitive Damages Awards:Reforming The Tort Reformers, American University Law Review(Summer,1993), pp.1296-1299.
②Michael Rustad, Thomas Koenig, The Historical Continuity of Punitive Damages Awards:Reforming the Tort Reformers, American University Law Review(Summer,1993). note 151, pp. 1296-1300.
③陈聪富等:《美国惩罚性赔偿金的发展趋势:改革运动与实证研究的对峙》,《法学丛刊》1998年第169期,第99页。
④Stephen Daniels& Joanne Martin, Myth and Reality in Punitive Damages, Minn, L. Rev. 75(1990) , p. 23.
①Victor E. Schwartz, Mark A.Behrens, Punitive Damgaes Reform: State Legislatures Can and Should Meet the Challenge Issued by the Supreme Court of the United Stated in Haslip, American University Law Review42(1993) , pp. 1365-1371.
②Steven R. Salbu, Developing Rational Punitive Damages Policies: Beyond the Constitution, Florida Law Review49(1997) , pp. 247-252.
③James B. Sales and Kenneth B,Cole,Jr., Punitive Damages: A Relic That Has Outlived Its Origins, Vanderbilt Law Review37 (1984) , pp.1117-1148.
④Kimberly A. Pace, The Tax Deductibility of Punitive DamagePayments: Who Should Ultimately Bear the Burden for Corporate Misconduct? Alabama Law Review 47(1996), pp. 825-843.
①Cass R.Sunstein,Deniel Kahneman and David Schkade, Assessing Punitive Damages (with Notes on Cognition and Jaluation in Law ), Vol 107,Yal ,L. 4(1998), p. 2094.
②U.S.Constitution Amendment 5.“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime ,unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arisin in the land or naval forces ,or in the Militia , when in a actual service in time of War or public danger ,nor shall bei compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself ,nor be deprived of life, liberty ,or property, without due process of law;nor shall private property be taken for public use ,without just compensation.”
③See James D.Ghiardi , John J.Kircher, supra note 48, at Chap.3, p.3.
④See James D.Ghiardi , John J.Kircher, supra note 48, at Chap.3, p. 2.
⑤Hansen v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. , 734 F2d 1036(CA5 1984), see Ghiardi and Kircher,supra note 53,at 4.
①U.S.Constitution Amendment 8, (Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.).
②Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc. , 492U.S.257(1989).
③Palmer v. A.H.Robins , CO. , 684 P.2d 187.
①U.S.Constitution Amendment 14, Section1.“All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall State deprive any person of life,liberty,or property, without due procwss of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
②See Linda L.Schlueter, Kenneth R.Redden, supra. note12, at 51-53 ; Robert E.Riggs, Constitutionalizing punitive Damages:The Limits of Due process, Ohio St.L.J 52(1991), pp. 859-869.
①王立峰:《论惩罚性赔偿》,载梁慧星主编《民商法论丛》(第15卷),法律出版社2007年版,第59页。
②BMW of North American Inc. v. Gore 116 S.Ct. 1589(1996).
①陈卫佐译:《德国民法典》,法律出版社2004年版,第75页。
②[德]迪特尔·梅迪库斯:《德国债法总论》,杜景林、卢谌译,法律出版社2004年版,第430页。
③陈卫佐:《德国民法典》,法律出版社2004年版,第265页
①河山:《论违约的惩罚性赔偿》,《中国工商管理研究》1996年第3期,第13页。
①杨栋:《外国法院惩罚性赔偿判决的承认与执行》,《政治与法律》1998年第5期,第41页。
①于敏:《日本侵权行为法》,法律出版社1998年版,第47页。
②[日]浦川道太郎:《日本法的惩罚性损害赔偿与制裁性慰谢金》,《法学家》2001年第5期,第118页。
③本节国外法规参见黄鸿图:《惩罚性损害赔偿制度之研究》,中国政法大学2001年博士学位论文,第79页。
①杨栋:《外国法院惩罚性赔偿判决的承认与执行》,《政治与法律》1998年第5期,第41页。
①杨栋:《外国法院惩罚性赔偿判决的承认与执行》,《政治与法律》1998年第5期,第41页。
②Day v. Woodsworth, http://supreme.justia.com/us/54/363/case.html. ( last visited November 9th ,2009).
①王文杰:《论我国民法移植的问题》,《法制与社会》2009年第7期,第14-15页。
①我国台湾地区《公平交易法》第三十二条规定了惩罚性赔偿条款,其立法目的是威慑侵权行为:“由于受害人常因损害额不大或甚难证明实际之损害范围,致不愿或不能向侵害人请求损害赔偿,此种情形将造成对不法侵害行为之纵容或鼓励。”
①郑杭生:《中国人民大学社会发展研究报告》,中国人民大学出版社2003年版,第86页。
②李凝:《社会弱势群体及其法律保护》,东南大学2006年硕士学位论文,第25-26页。
①我国台湾地区法规参见谢哲胜:《财产法专题研究》(二),中国人民大学出版社2004年版,第27-30页。
②《健康食品管理法》,“北大法意”, http://www.lawyee.net/Act/Act_Other_TW_Display.asp?ChannelID =1040000&KeyWord=&RID=6676,2009年5月4日。
①参见国家工商行政管理局条法司:《消费者权益保护法释义》,长春出版社1993年版,第117-118页。
①梁慧星:《消费者权益保护第四十九条的解释适用》,载梁慧星主编《民商法论丛》(第20卷),香港金桥文化出版有限公司2001年版,第400-406页。
①牟瑞瑾:《消费者权益保护法第四十九条的适用条件》,载梁慧星主编《民商法论丛》(第15卷),法律出版社2000年版,第230页。
①王利明、崔建远:《合同法新论:总则》,中国政法大学出版社2000年修订版,第271页。
②史尚宽:《民法总论》,中国政法大学出版社2000年版,第381页。
①袁武强、张在范:《论我国食品安全领域惩罚性赔偿责任制度的重构》,《行政与法》2009年第1期,第73页。
①高静、王芳:《论食品安全法中的惩罚性赔偿责任》,《广西政法管理干部学院学报》2009年第4期,第104页。
②高静、王芳:《论食品安全法中的惩罚性赔偿责任》,《广西政法管理干部学院学报》2009年第4期,第105页。
①王利明:《中华人民共和国侵权责任法释义》,中国法制出版社2010年版,第231页。
①台湾《民事诉讼法》第四十四条之一规定:多数有共同利益之人为同一公益社团法人之社员者,于章程所定目的范围内,得选定该法人为选定人起诉。法人依前项规定为社员提起金钱赔偿损害之诉时,如选定人全体以书状表明愿由法院判定被告应给付选定人之总额,并就给付总额之分配方法达成协议者,法院得不分别认定被告应给付各选定人之数额,而仅就被告应给付选定人全体之总额为裁判。
②请求之主体,除受害之消费者外,第三人可否请求?台湾板桥地方法院于89年度重诉字第65号博士的家判决中,持肯定意见,理由如下:一、参照消费者保护法第7条第3项之规定,企业经营者于违反合同第1、2项之规定致生损害于消费者或第三人时,该企业经营者对第三人亦应负连带赔偿责任;二、惩罚性赔偿金制度既在惩罚和嚇阻,自无将因企业经营者之鲁莽不顾公共安全致受有损害之第三人亦得类推适用本条之规定请求惩罚性赔偿金,较符立法目的。黄立:《板桥法院89年度重诉字第65号博士的家判决评析》,《月旦法学杂志》2003年第95期,第228页。
①金福海:《惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,法律出版社2008年版,第180页。
①金福海:《惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,法律出版社2008年版,第181页。
②李建华等:《民法总论》,科学出版社2007年版,第220页。
①释明权:“百度百科”,http://baike.baidu.com/view/36540.htm?fr=ala0_1_1,2010年4月13日。
①魏振瀛:《民法》(第三版),北京大学出版社、高等教育出版社2007年版,第688页。
②程啸:《侵权行为法总论》,人民大学出版社2008年版,第338页。
①张明楷:《刑法学》,法律出版社2003年版,第224页。(张明楷教授指出:直接故意与间接故意虽然存在区别,但二者在法律上的地位却是相同的。)
②魏振瀛:《民法》(第三版),北京大学出版社、高等教育出版社2007年版,第689页。
③汪泽:《民法上的善意、恶意及其适用》,《河北法学》1996年第1期,第10页。
④张新宝:《中国民法典·侵权行为法编草案建议稿》,http://www.civillaw.com.cn/qqf/weizhang.asp?id=11017,2010年4月12日。
①王利明:《侵权行为法研究》(上卷),中国人民大学出版社2004年版,第349页。
②史尚宽:《债法总论》,中国政法大学出版社2000年版,第111页。
①魏振瀛主编:《民法》,北京大学出版社2007年版,第684页。
②程啸:《侵权行为法总论》,中国人民大学出版社2008年版,第99页。
①陈聪富:《因果关系与损害赔偿》,北京大学出版社2006年版,第156页。
①崔明峰、河山:《英美法上惩罚性赔偿制度研究》,《河北法学》2000年第3期,第126页。
①中国民法典草案立法研究课题组:《中国民法典草案建议稿》,法律出版社2003年版第325页。
②王利明主编:《中国民法典草案建议稿及说明》,中国法制出版社2004年版,第253页。
③徐国栋主编:《绿色民法典草案》,社会科学文献出版社2004年版,第725页。
④张新宝:《中国民法典·侵权行为编草案建议稿》,“中国民商法律网”, http://www.civilaw.com.cn/articla /default.asp?id=11017,2009年1月28日。
①张新宝:《中国民法典·侵权行为编草案建议稿》,“中国民商法律网”, http://www.civilaw.com.cn/articla /default.asp?id=11017,2009年1月28日。
①[英]梅因:《古代法》,沈景一译,商务印书馆1997年版,第15页。
[1]李建华,蔡立东.民法总论[M].北京:科学出版社,2007.
[2]张文显.法哲学范畴研究[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001.
[3]王利明.侵权行为法归责原则研究[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.
[4]陈聪富.侵权归责原则与损害赔偿[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
[5]程啸.侵权行为法总论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2008.
[6]曾隆兴.详解损害赔偿法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.
[7]于敏.日本侵权行为法[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[8]董安生.民事法律行为[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2002.
[9]李响编.美国侵权法原理及案例研究[C].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.
[10]林诚二.民法总则(上、下)[M].北京:法律出版社,2008.
[11]王利明.民法总则研究[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2003.
[12]徐爱国.英美侵权行为法学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
[13]王利明.侵权行为法研究[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004.
[14]崔建远.合同法总论(上卷)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2008.
[15]韩世远.合同法总论[M].北京:法律出版社,2008.
[16]何主宇编著.英美法案例研读全程指南[C].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[17]韩世远,[日]下森定主编.履行障碍法研究[C].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[18]韩世远.履行障碍法的体系[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[19]夏芸.医疗事故赔偿法——来自日本法的启示[M].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[20]林诚二.民法问题与实例分析[M].北京:法律出版社,2008.
[21]胡雪梅.英国侵权法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2008.
[22]徐爱国等编译.哈佛法学评论——侵权法学精粹[C].北京:法律出版社,2005.
[23]崔建远.合同法(第4版)[M].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[24]陈朝璧.罗马法原理[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[25]王立峰.惩罚的哲理[M].北京:清华大学出版社,2006.
[26]王卫国.过错责任原则——第三次勃兴[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2000.
[27]张新宝.侵权责任法原理[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2005.
[28]邱聪智.从侵权行为归责原理之变动论危险责任之构成[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006.
[29]陈聪富.侵权归责原则与损害赔偿[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
[30]杨立新.人身权法论[M].北京:中国检察出版社,1996.
[31]赵汀阳.论可能生活[M].上海:三联书店,1994.
[32]张宏生主编.西方法律思想史[C].北京:北京大学出版社,1983.
[33]杨立新.侵权法论[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2005.
[34]王泽鉴.侵权行为法(1)[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001.
[35]于敏.日本侵权行为法[M].北京:法律出版社,1998.
[36]郭明瑞,房绍坤,於向平.民事责任论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1991.
[37]张民安.现代法国侵权责任制度研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[38]王利明.违约责任论[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000.
[39]王军.侵权行为法比较研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[40]金瑞林.环境法学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1999.
[41]邱聪智.从侵权行为归责原理之变动论危险责任之构成[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006.
[42]王利明.合同法新问题研究[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2003.
[43]谢怀轼.合同法原理[M].北京:法律出版社,2000.
[44]刘杨.法律正当性观念的转变[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2003.
[45]胡平.精神损害赔偿制度研究[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2003.
[46]张新宝.侵权责任构成要件研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[47]梁慧星主编.民商法论丛(第15卷)[C].北京:法律出版社,2000.
[48]梁慧星主编.民商法论丛(第20卷)[C].北京:法律出版社,2001.
[49]谢哲胜.财产法专题研究(二)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004.
[50]刘士国.侵权责任法重大疑难问题研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2009.
[51]曾世雄.损害赔偿法原理[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001.
[52]张新宝.侵权责任法原理[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2005.
[53]温世扬,廖焕国.物权法定论[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2005.
[54]汪治平.人身损害赔偿若干问题研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2001.
[55]崔建远主编.民法9人行(第2卷)[C].香港:金桥文化出版有限公司,2004.
[56]高铭暄,马克昌主编.刑法学[M].北京:中国法制出版社,1999.
[57]杜齐才.价值与价值观念[M].广东:广东人民出版社,1987.
[58]周世中.法的合理性研究[M].山东:山东人民出版社,2004.
[59]郑成良.现代法理学[M].吉林:吉林大学出版社,1999.
[60]周世中,黄竹胜.法的价值及其实现[M].广西:广西师范大学出版社,1998 .
[61]杨震.法价值哲学导论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2004.
[62]卓泽渊.法的价值论(第二版)[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[63]江平主编.中华人民共和国合同法精解[C].北京:中国政法大学出版,1999.
[64]谢鹏程.基本法律价值[M].山东:山东人民出版社,2000 .
[65]关淑芳.惩罚性赔偿制度研究[M].北京:中国人民公安大学出版社,2008.
[66]沈宗灵.法理学[M].北京:高等教育出版社,1994.
[67]国家工商行政管理局条法司.消费者权益保护法释义[M].吉林:长春出版社,1993.
[68]王利明,崔建远.合同法新论总则[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000.
[69]史尚宽.民法总论[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000.
[70]中国民法典草案立法研究课题组.中国民法典草案建议稿[M].北京:法律出版社,2003.
[71]王利明.中国民法典草案建议稿及说明[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2004.
[72]徐国栋主编.绿色民法典草案[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2004.
[1] [意]毛罗·布撒尼,[美]弗农·瓦伦丁·帕尔默主编.欧洲法中的纯粹经济损失[M].张小义,钟洪明译.北京:法律出版社,2005.
[2] [美]詹姆斯·戈德雷.私法的基础:财产,侵权,合同和不当得利[M].张家勇译.北京:法律出版社,2007.
[3] [法]米歇尔·福柯.规训与惩罚[M].刘北成,杨远婴译.上海:三联书店,2003.
[4] [日]田中英夫,竹内昭夫.私人在法实现中的作用[M].李薇译.北京:法律出版社,2006.
[5] [德]克雷斯蒂安·冯·巴尔.欧洲比较侵权行为法(上)[M].张新宝译.北京:法律出版社,2004.
[6] [德]克雷斯蒂安·冯·巴尔.欧洲比较侵权行为法(下)[M].焦美华译.北京:法律出版社,2004.
[7] [德]马克西米利安·福克斯.侵权行为法[M].齐晓琨译.北京:法律出版社,2006.
[8] [美]文森特R.约翰逊.美国侵权法[M].赵秀文译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004.
[9] [德]克雷斯蒂安·冯·巴尔,乌里希·德罗布尼希主编.欧洲合同法与侵权法及财产法的互动[M].吴越,王洪等译.北京:法律出版社,2007.
[10] [美]罗尔斯.正义论[M].何怀宏等译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1998.
[11] [英]彼得·凯恩.阿蒂亚论事故、赔偿及法律(第六版)[M].王仰光,朱呈文等译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2008.
[12] [美]罗伯特·考特,托马斯·尤伦.法和经济学[M].张军译.上海:三联书店,上海人民出版社,1994.
[13] [美] E﹒博登海默.法理学——法律哲学与法律方法[M].邓正来译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999.
[14] [美]肯尼斯·S·亚伯拉罕,阿尔伯特·C·泰特选编.侵权法重述——纲要[M].许传玺,石宏等译.北京:法律出版社,2006.
[15] [美]理查德·A·波斯纳.法律的经济分析[M].蒋兆康,林毅夫译.北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1997.
[16] [英]梅因.古代法[M].沈景一译.北京:商务印书馆,1997.
[17] [美]彼得·斯坦,约翰·香德.西方社会的法律价值[M].王献平译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,1998.
[18] [德]德迪特尔·梅迪库斯.德国债法总论[M].杜景林,卢谌译.北京:法律出版社,2004.
[19] [美]科赛.社会冲突的功能[M].北京:华夏出版社,1988.
[20] [美]鲁道夫·冯·耶林.为权利而斗争[M].胡宝海译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999.
[21] [美]罗斯科·庞德.通过法律的社会控制——法律的任务[M].沈宗灵,董世忠译.北京:商务印书馆,2008.
[1]杨栋.外国法院惩罚性赔偿判决的承认与执行[J].山东法学,1998(5):39-43.
[2]杨福忠.试论法律规范的正当性[J].首都师范大学学报,2005(5):53-59.
[3]郭玉军.国际商事仲裁中的惩罚性赔偿裁决[J].法学评论,2002(1):116-122.
[4]符琪.简论惩罚性赔偿制度[J].河南大学学报(社会科学版),2001(3):43-46.
[5]吕世伦,周世中.论法治的合理性[J].当代法学1998(2):17-21.
[6]崔明峰,欧山.英美法上惩罚性赔偿制度研究[J].河北法学,2000(3):124-127.
[7]王利明.美国惩罚性赔偿制度研究[J].比较法研究,2003(5):1-12.
[8]熊进光.论惩罚性赔偿在合同领域适用的正当性[J].上海政法学院学报,2005(1):82-87.
[9]胡刚.论我国合同责任中惩罚性赔偿的适用[J].太原经济管理干部学院学报,2004(1):30-33.
[10]河山.论违约的惩罚性赔偿[J].中国工商管理研究,1996(3):12-14.
[11]王利明.惩罚性赔偿研究[J].中国法学,2000(4):112-122 .
[12]王立峰.论惩罚性损害赔偿[A].梁慧星主编.民商法论丛(第15卷)[C].北京:法律出版社,2000:54-113.
[13]王雪琴.惩罚性赔偿制度研究[A].梁慧星主编.民商法论丛(第20卷)[C].北京:法律出版社,2000:100-145.
[14]梁慧星.消费者权益保护第四十九条的解释适用[A].民商法论丛(第20卷)[C].香港:金桥文化出版有限公司,2001:400-406.
[15]董文军.论我国《消费者权益保护法》中的惩罚性赔偿[J].当代法学,2006(2):69-74.
[16]祁光明,张彦春.论惩罚性赔偿制度[J].内蒙古民族大学学报(社会科学版),2007(2):95-97.
[17]仇云霞,何维国.合同责任中惩罚性损害赔偿的适用[J].湖北社会科学,2002(2):50-52.
[18]朱凯.惩罚性赔偿在侵权法中的基础及其适用[J].中国法学,2003(3):86-93.
[19]郑宁,余华.论侵犯商业秘密的惩罚性赔偿之建立[J].和田师范专科学校学报,2006(1):3-5.
[20]金福海.论惩罚性赔偿责任的性质[J].法学评论,2004(3):59-63.
[21]徐海燕.我国导入惩罚性赔偿制度的法学思考[J].杭州师范学院学报(社会科学版),2004(2):99-104.
[22]陈颖洲,高仁宝.惩罚性赔偿制度初探[J].法律适用,2001(5):56-58.
[23]饶世权.论《消费者权益保护法》中惩罚性赔偿制度之完善[J].吉林大学社会科学学报,2000(6):88-91.
[24]叶彬琪.民法通则应增设惩罚性赔偿条款[J].人民司法,1994(10):32-33.
[25]王小红,钟海华.也谈民法中惩罚性赔偿责任——兼与叶彬琪同志商榷[J].人民司法,1995(3):29-30.
[26]王成.侵权损害赔偿计算的经济分析——以人身及精神损害赔偿为背景[J].比较法研究,2004(2):96-100.
[27]吕彦.关于过错的若干问题探讨[J].现代法学,1999(2):58-62.
[28]徐爱国.重新解释侵权行为法的公平责任原则[J].政治与法律,2003(6):33-44.
[29]汪泽.民法上的善意、恶意及其适用[J].河北法学,1996(1):7-12.
[30]刘士国.论无过错责任[J].法学研究,1994(5):37-42.
[31]董春华.美国产品责任法中的惩罚性赔偿[J].比较法研究,2008(5) :99-110.
[32]杨立新.对我国侵权责任法规定惩罚性赔偿金制裁恶意产品侵权行为探讨[J].中州法学,2009(2):67-72.
[33]张新宝,李倩.惩罚性赔偿的立法选择[J].清华法学,2009(4):5-20.
[34]杨立新.论埃塞俄比亚侵权行为法对中国侵权行为法的借鉴意义[J].扬州大学学报,2005(5):23-30.
[35]陈聪富.美国法上之惩罚性赔偿金的发展趋势:改革运动与实证研究的对峙[J].台大法学论丛, 1997(1):231-264.
[36]林德瑞.论惩罚性赔偿[J].中正大学法学集刊,1998(1):25-66.
[37]林德瑞.论惩罚性赔偿金可保性之法律争议[J].中正大学法学集刊,1999(2):103-129.
[38]何建志.惩罚性赔偿金之法理与应用——论最适赔偿金之判定[J].台大法学论丛,2002(3):237-289.
[1]陈春玲.论惩罚性赔偿金之法律争议与风险管理[D].台北:国立政治大学,2004.
[2]游成润.违反公平交易法之损害赔偿责任——以限制竞争法为中心[D].台北:国立政治大学,2003.
[3]郑巧筠.论侵害专利权之惩罚性赔偿[D].台北:国立台湾大学,2009.
[4]庄丽檬.论食品企业经营者的民事责任[D].台北:国立成功大学,2005.
[5]赵弥嘉.专利侵害惩罚性赔偿之主观要件——中美比较研究[D].台北:世新大学,2009.
[6]黄鸿图.惩罚性损害赔偿制度之研究——兼论两岸《消保法》之法制[D].北京:中国政法大学,2006.
[7]余艺.惩罚性赔偿研究[D].重庆:西南政法大学,2006.
[1] A. Mitchell Kolinsky, Steven Shovel. Punitive Damages : A Economic Analysis [J].Harvard Law Review, 1998, 111: 869-962.
[2] Andrew M. Kenewick. The Constitutionality of Punitive Damages: Under the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment [J]. Michigan Law Review, 1987, 85: 1699-1726.
[3] Peter Birks. Wrongs and Remedies in the Twenty-first Century [M]. London: Clarendon Press, 1996.
[4] Anthony Duggan. Exemplary Damages in Equity: A Law and Economics Perspective[J]. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 2006, 26: 303-326.
[5] Thomas B. Colby. Beyond the Multiple Punishment Problem: Punitive Damages as Punishment for Individual, Private Wrongs[J]. Minn. L. Rev., 2003, 87:583-678.
[6] Anthony J. Sebok. What did Punitive Damages Do? Why Misunderstanding the History of Punitive Damages Matters Today[J]. Chi-Kent L. Rev., 2003, 78: 163-206.
[7] Elliot Klayman, Seth Klayman. Punitive Damages: Toward Torah-Based Tort Reform[J]. Cardozo L. Rev., 2001, 23: 221-252.
[8] Fred W. Morgan, Karl A. Boedecker. Punitive Damages after BMW v. Gore[J]. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 1997, 16: 163-172.
[9] Gregory S. Pipe. Exemplary Damages After Camelford[J]. The Modern Law Review, 1994, 57: 91-101.
[10] Ernst C. Stiefel et al. The Enforceability of Excessive U. S. Punitive Damage Awards in Germany[J]. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 1991, 39: 779-802.
[11] R. W. Hodgin, E. Veitch. Punitive Damages: Reassessed[J]. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 1972, 21: 119-132.
[12] The Law Commission. Aggravated, Exemplary and Restitutionary Damages[EB/ OL]. [2009-09-12].http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/lc247.pdf.
[13] Punitive Damages Reform. [EB/OL]. [2009-09-14].http://www.atra. org/show/7343.
[14] David Friedman. An Economic Explanation of Punitive Damages[J/OL].[2009 -09-16].http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Punitive/Punitive.html.
[15] Supreme Court Tightens Limits On Punitive Damages. [J/OL].[2009-09-18]. http://www.goodwinprocter.com/~/media/51810653EE2542E6B0A845D9068D2DC0.ashx.
[16] Thomas H. Cohen. Punitive Damage Awards in Large Counties, 2001 [J/OL]. [2009-09-23]. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/pdalc01.pdf.
[17] Punitive damages Review 2006.[2009-09-124].http://www.travelers.com/ business/excessCasualty/docs/PunitiveDamages.pdf.
[18] J. Clark Kelso&Kari C. Kelso, Ph.D. An Analysis of Punitive Damages in CaliforniaCourts, 1991-2000[J/OL]. [2009-09-28].http://www.mcgeorge.edu/ documents/ centers/government/ccglp_pubs_punitive_damages_report.PDF.
[19] Jedediah wakefield, jennifer fraser parrish. California Supreme Court Clarifies Guidelines for Punitive Damages[J/OL]. [2009-10-09].http://www.fenwick.com/ docstore/Publications/Litigation/Litigation_Alert_07-05-05.pdf.
[20] John Y. Gotanda. Punitive Damages: A Comparative Analysis[J/OL]. [2009-10- 12]. ttp://law.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=Villano valwps.
[21] Francesco Quarta Recognition and Enforcement of U.S.Punitive Damages Awards in Continental Europe: The Italian Supreme Court’s Veto[J/OL].[2009-10-117] . http://ssrn.com/abstract=1182442.
[22] Ernest J. Weinrib. Restitutionary Damages as Corrective Justice[J/OL]. [2009 -10-21]. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1273346.
[23] Stephen J. Choi & Theodore Eisenberg. Punitive Damages in Securities Arbitration: An Empirical Study[J/OL]. [2009-10-22]. http://ssrn.com/abstract= 1322482.
[24] John Bronsteen, Christopher Buccafusco, and Jonathan Masur. Happiness and Punishment[J/OL]. [2009-10-29]. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1313360.
[25] Georges Cavalier Jean-Sébastien Quéguiner Punitive Damages and French Public Policy[J/OL]. [2009-11-03] http://ssrn.com/abstract=1174363
[26] Christopher J. Robinette. A Public Purpose for Punitive Damages? [J/OL]. [2009-09-12]. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1114091.
[27] Paulo Barrozo. Punishing Cruelly: Punishment, Cruelty, and Mercy[J/OL]. [2009-11-04]. Http://ssrn.com/abstract=1005550.
[28] Christopher R. Green The Food-Chain Issue for Corporate Punishment:What Criminal Law and Punitive Damages Can Learn from Each Other [J/OL]. [2009-11-06]. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1102754.