Research On Civil Compensation For The Damages Suffered By Salvors In Righteous Action

Since ancient times,being brave in doing righteousness is a virtuous behavior that has been praised and praised by people,which is in line with the core socialist values? ? advocated by our country.However,the urgency and danger of the act of righteousness and courage make the rescuer face a greater risk of personal or property damage during rescue.How to make rescuers have no worries when they act bravely,and their damage can be effectively relieved after acting bravely,has become the focus of our country’s civil law.However,the amendment of the Civil Code to the relief provisions for damages to managers in no-cause management puts the legal application of the relief for damages to rescuers in an embarrassing situation again.In addition,the determination of "infringer","beneficiary" and "permissible" in the Courage Clause is still unclear,making it more difficult for the courts to hear cases where Courage has been damaged.In this regard,this thesis uses comparative analysis,literature analysis and empirical analysis to compare and analyze mainstream views,and to sort out and analyze court judgments in the past five years.The full text is divided into four parts:The first part reinterprets the legal concept of bravery,sorts out the relationship between bravery and management without cause,and demonstrates the necessity of civil relief,by reinterpreting the legal concept of bravery by adding basic concepts and filling out the subject of civil remedies that save people’s damage through bravery.Finally,the macro points out two major paths for the rescuer to seek damage relief,namely,claiming damages from the infringer and claiming damages from the beneficiary.The second part discusses the basis of the right to claim civil relief for the rescuer’s damage in the act of bravery.This part makes a micro-interpretation on the basis of the two claims of righteousness and courageousness and management without cause,and points out that there are disputes among the academic circles on the subject of responsibility,the beneficiaries and their responsibility forms,the positioning of the compensation obligation system and the identification of the conditions for the beneficiaries to bear the responsibility in the clauses of courageousness and righteousness.And there are doubts about the theoretical basis of "appropriate compensation" in the revised no-cause management clause and the problem of conflicting with the legal value.Finally,the relationship between the two major claims bases is integrated and discussed to pave the way for the solution of the following legal application issues.The third part analyzes the judicial status and deficiencies of the rescuer’s damaged civil relief.Through the screening,data sorting and analysis of the judgment documents of the past five years,it is found that the courts have greater discretion in such cases,and the case judgments are not uniform and non-standard,which also leads to the occurrence of different judgments in the same case.The irregularity of judicial judgment is mainly manifested in the confusion of law application,the ambiguous scope of compensation for beneficiaries,the non-uniform consideration of damage compensation,and the non-uniform debt-bearing methods among beneficiaries.The fourth part puts forward the perfect suggestion for the rescuer’s damaged civil relief.This part clarifies the point of view of this thesis and puts forward suggestions for improvement in view of the disputes and problems mentioned in the second and third parts.First,it is advocated that the two foundations of claim rights should be systematically cooperated.Second,the scope of compensation for damage is limited to the direct damage of the rescuer,pure economic losses are not included in the compensation,and the mental damage consolation fund depends on the survival of the rescuer.Third,eight essential factors,such as the economic situation of the parties,the local standard of living,the degree of damage to the rescuer,and the fault of the rescuer,should be taken into account when standardizing the court’s adjudication of cases.Fourth,it is clear that multiple beneficiaries bear joint and several liability.Fifth,when "the infringer’s compensation is insufficient",the provisions of "the infringer cannot bear the civil liability" shall be applied by analogy,and the beneficiary shall make compensation.