See Study On The Right To Claim Damages By The Righteous

Both in comparative law and in our country’s legislation,they have taken a positive attitude towards the question of whether compensation for damages other than tort damage compensation should be given to those who have acted in a righteous way,and they have been given the right to request the beneficiary to compensate for the damage they have suffered.right.Article 183 of the "Civil Code" is a characteristic clause of our country,and the right to claim compensation for damages due to justice has an independent and important position in the damage relief system.There are also big differences in the functional nature,the scope of relief,the applicable occasion and the subject of relief between the relief or the right to claim for no-cause management according to public law that cannot be compensated for damages.As far as the applicable conditions of the right to claim compensation for damages for righteous actions are concerned,it mainly includes three requirements:the brave action for righteousness does not bear legal obligations or contractual obligations,the brave action for righteousness suffers damage,and there is a causal relationship between the rescue behavior and the consequences of the damage.By means of the basic analysis of the right of claim,the applicable situations of Article183 of the Civil Code can be divided into two situations: the infringer is liable and the infringer is not liable.Under the circumstance that the person bears the responsibility,the right to claim for damage compensation has the supplementary feature of second order.In judicial practice,the issue of the beneficiary’s request for compensation by the beneficiary is centered on the interpretation and application of Article 183 of the Civil Code.In this process,the application of Article 183 and Article 979 must be coordinated.Since my country’s "Civil Code" adopts a dual model on the issue of damage compensation for brave acts of justice,there are conflicts between legal provisions.Article 183 of the "Civil Code" stipulates "appropriate compensation" for the damage suffered by brave acts of justice and management without cause.In the system,there are conflicts in the application of the "repayment of necessary expenses" for the damage to the administrator.The current mainstream theories,whether it is the "competition theory of claim rights" that can be applied alternatively or the "competition theory of legal provisions" that preferentially applies to special clauses,are all in conflict.The conflict cannot be reasonably mitigated.A more appropriate way is to systematically review the special legislative purpose of Article 183 of the Civil Code,and then split and apply it according to different situations.The specific method of splitting is to consider the constituent elements and legal effects of the articles.Three types of occasions are discussed: one is the situation where there is no infringer;the second is the situation where there is an infringer but the infringer cannot take responsibility,specifically including two situations where the infringer escapes but the infringer has not escaped but has no ability to bear responsibility;Where the infringer can be held liable.The final result of the discussion is that in the first two cases,Article 183 and Article 979 of the Civil Code constitute a co-opetitive relationship of claim rights,and one of them can be applied;in the third case,Article183 and Article 979 of the Civil Code Article 979 constitutes the relationship between general clauses and special clauses,and the application of Article 183 of the Civil Code shall be applied first and the application of Article 979 shall be excluded.In addition,the transformation of the right to claim compensation for damages caused by brave acts of justice from theory to reality must be based on the improvement of its applicable conditions in judicial practice.The specific improvements include relaxing the requirements for rescue obligations,expanding the scope of recognition of damages to those who are brave for righteousness,and clarifying the results of rescue behaviors,etc.And three aspects of causality identification criteria.On this basis,the four-step basic logic of "agreed priority,determine damage,divide fault,and combine other factors" is proposed to determine the amount of compensation for the right to claim compensation for damages.