On Punitive Damages In Product Liability

Punitive damages originated in the common law, based on the position for separatingpublic and private law, and abiding by the principle of compensation for civil damages, thecivil law do not admit punitive damages in private law. Although China is a civil law country,but for China’s national conditions——malignant product accidents happen frequently, andprotection for consumers is too low in the international market, compensatory damages aloneis not sufficient to calm the serious situation for product liability, We must set up the punitivedamages in product liability in order to punish the perpetrators and prevent similar behavior.China’s " Tort Liability Act " Article47for the first time established the system ofpunitive damages in a general product liability, but for some practical matters, like theimputation principle and applicable conditions, still need further explanation, and theapplicable relations between the relevant legislation needs clarification, such as the crossapplication between the "Tort Liability Act" Article47and the "Consumer Protection Law"Article55which determines the specific amount of compensation, and with the "food SafetyLaw" Article96punitive damages apply to the food area. Each of these provisions supports tobuild a punitive damages system in product liability.This article has five sections except the introduction.The first part, through the comments on the "Toyota recall scandal", explores thepractical significance on introducing of punitive damages into product liability.The second part describes the different attitude to punitive damages between theAnglo-American law and the civil law，the present legislation situation in our country，andits rationality. The punitive damages origins and prevails in the Anglo American law system,but civil law does not admit. The civil law system pursues the compensatory system, insiststhat punishment is only the function of public law, damages in private law abides the principleof compensation. The reason why our country breaks through the traditional compensationprinciple, and introduces punitive damages into products liability, is that this system has itsrationality and necessity. The author believes that the compensatory damages has it`s inherentdefects, namely it has been unable to contain malicious product tort emerge in an endlessstream, and the punitive damages can make up for this shortcomings, To punish and preventmalicious product infringement. The third part discusses the unique imputation principle, applicable conditions andexemptions in the system of punitive damages on products liability, unlike the compensatorydamages, the punitive damages apply to the Fault liability principle, requires the "knowingly"fault of the business dealer and the serious personal injury consequences of the victim. On theexemption, the legal exemptions stipulated on "product quality law" Artical41and negligenceare applicable to punitive damages, the difference is that the former does not of course applyto punitive damages in the seller, while the latter (negligence) used in the punitive damageshas more stringent requirements: the victim has intention or gross negligence(not generalnegligence).The fourth part discusses on the calculation method of the specific amount ofcompensation. Since the punitive damages amount calculation method is described in detail inthe revised "consumer protection law" article fifty-fifth paragraph2, so this part only makesthe necessary analysis, and discusses the factors which should be considered in the process ofthe amount, combining foreign experience.Section V discusses the shortcomings and deficiencies that exist in the system, such asthe indeterminacy on how to assume responsibility among different subjects; fails toconverge with the recall system; the applicable relations between the relevant legislationneeds clarification, the author put forward his own opinion on perfection of these defects.