再論法人自己行為的侵權責任

Re-comment on Juridical Person’s Tort Liability

最高法院於2020年公布新聞稿，肯定法人得依民法第184條規定負自己行為的侵權責任，據此變更其70餘年來的多數見解，具有絕對的重要性，因此引起學者廣泛討論，肯定者有之，質疑者有之。本文綜合論述各家學說爭議，並闡述法人自己侵權責任的重要議題。本文肯定法人具有團體意思；法人團體所承擔的組織義務係屬交易安全義務之一種類型；法人的組織義務包含組織營運義務及組織設置義務；法人組織過失的責任在理論上雖為過失責任，但在實務運作時，則接近於嚴格責任；又法人自己行為責任具有獨立性，得與僱用人責任等規定併存或獨自成立。

The Supreme Court announced in 2020 that a juridical person may be held liable for its acts under article 184 of the Civil Code, which changed the majority rule of this court that had been endorsed for over 70 years in the past. This Supreme Court’s decision brought about immediate and fierce discussion among scholars, with some of them supporting it while some of them opposing it. This paper comprehensively comments on these diverse opinions and further discusses the major issues arising from the juridical person’s tort liability under article 184 of the Civil Code. This paper confirms the juridical person’s decision-making ability, and the organizational duty of a juridical person is one of the duties covered by the duty of social security. The liability based on the organizational negligence is a negligent liability in theory, while it is similar to strict liability in practice. The liability under article 184 of the Civil Code can be co-established with articles 188 and 28 of the Civil Code, or be established by itself.