Research On Civil Punitive Damages System In China

Punitive damages system, originated in England and produced a hundred years ago, is a civil system and popular in the common law countries, especially in the United States. In U.S., the essence of punitive damages system is not only retained, but also combined with their domestic innovation. It expands the scope of application, sets up the criteria and gradually completes the system. Since China’s reform and opening-up policy, the economy of socialist market springs up and witnesses the rapid improvement of the national living standard. Meanwhile, there are some chaotic phenomena in the market, such as the frequent occurrence of the fraud of fake food. What’s more, the food safety incidents in the food industry is becoming a common phenomenon. Businessmen’s pursuit of profit is understandable, but some of them are driven by huge interests by cutting corners, regardless of the others’safety. This behavior should be severely forbidden, and the punitive damages system readily hits the point. It exerts high punitive damages on the infringer by paying a heavy price, who dare to make similar violations. The punitive damages system has been introduced into some areas in China, but the relevant policies are not available. As a result, the development of punitive damages system in China is relatively slow and plays a limited role. This paper tries to analyzes and gives some suggestions to the problems existing in this system, hoping to make system of punitive damages be more effective in our country.This paper consists of five parts:The first part introduces the concept of punitive damages, and its properties are explored in detail. The academic debate for the nature of punitive damages is divided into three perspectives:first, the nature of private law; second is the nature of public law and the third is the nature of both of them, which is also known as the nature of economic law. Based on the analysis, the author supports the first viewpoint, namely the private nature of punitive damages. The paper also makes a comparison among the punitive damages, punitive liquidated damages, mental damages, exemplary damages and penalties, in order to make clear the characteristics of punitive damages. By introducing functional system of punitive damages, the paper mainly analyzes its three main functions:the punishing function, the repressing function and the compensation function.The second part analyzes the legal basis for punitive damages from the perspectives of the philosophy of law and civil law. The philosophy of law is the basic discipline in legal research, which focuses on the value of law. Therefore, this paper takes it as the entry point, and expounds the value of freedom of punitive damages system, its value of order and the value of justice. The significance of punitive damages for civil law manifests itself in the protection of victims’rights and improvement of the civil law system. It’s of practical needs to transplant punitive damages system in the rapid development of market economy today, in the sense that it helps to accelerate our pace to meet with the international standards and enhance the enthusiasm of our people for their own rights.The third part focuses on the current situation of China’s legislative system of punitive damages and its defects. In terms of the current situation of legislation, China’s five major areas of the law specify the content for punitive damages: "Consumer Protection Law", "Food Safety Law", "Tort Liability Act", "Real Estate Sales Contracts Judicial Interpretation" and "Tourism Law". As to the system deficiency, the paper mainly revolves around such issues as the narrow scope of punitive damages, the unreasonable amount of punitive damages and the imperfection of matching system for punitive damages, and then thoroughly elaborates that the narrow scope of punitive damages results from the parochialism of the subject and the object; the problem of the unreasonable amount of punitive damages lies in the unscientific compensation base and compensation models and the lack of the standard for reference when the judge makes discretion; as to the imperfection of matching system for punitive damages reflects in the informal policy for food safety and unfavorable burden of proof for infringers.The fourth part centers on the development of punitive damages system overseas, as well as their enlightenment to China. Punitive damages originated in Britain, developed in the United State. It advanced and completed the scope of application, the applicable conditions, the amount of punitive damages and other aspects of the criteria so punitive damages system of common law are worthy for our reference. Germany, as the representative of civil law countries whose legal system is similar to ours, rejects the legislative approach for punitive damages system. However, in judicial practice, judges often make verdicts containing punitive damages factors, which shows that in civil law countries the attitude for punitive damages is not absolutely refused. The two legal system of punitive damages has an important reference for the establishment of punitive damages in China at this stage. On the one hand, we have to be cautious to advance punitive damages system in our country; on the other hand we should attach great importance to acceptance in their own culture for punitive damages.The fifth part sets forth the measure for the improvement of the system of punitive damages, directing at the major deficiencies noted in the third part. First, the scope of application for punitive damages should be expanded. The system of punitive damages should be introduced in the field of intellectual property and the environment infringement. Then, a reasonable amount of punitive damages should be determined. Finally, the relevant institutional construction of punitive damages should be strengthened, which means to regulate the food safety standards and complete the system of burden of proof.