再訪我國《侵權責任法》第59條：情景化、類型化與限縮性適用

Revisiting Article 59 of China's Tort Liability Law: Contextualization, Catagorization and Restrictive Application

《侵權責任法》第59條出身於我國醫藥不分家的醫療體制，它過於注重醫療機構在銷售醫療產品這一表徵，而沒有對醫療服務區別於商品銷售的特性給予充分考慮。在醫藥尚未分離的時代，第59條具有存留價值。在醫療機構走向醫藥分家的進程中，與其狹隘地、機械地、不加區分地適用第59條從而將其演化為舊體制的固化劑，不如全面地、辯證地、區分地分析醫療機構的責任歸屬、使其細微地反映不同情形，將第59條演變為新體制產生和建立的壓力閥和推動器。可通過類型化處理方式，比如醫療機構的類型化、服務商品區分的類型化、產品缺陷的類型化、醫療產品的類型化和與醫療產品有關的責任類型化，來緩解第59條對醫療服務提供者所帶來的負面影響。Article 59 of Tort Liability Lae was bron in a context where provision of health service is not separated from sale of madical products. It gives too much emphasis to the medical institutions are involved in the affair of selling goods, lacking full consideration of the distinct nature of health care. Inan era when provision of health services is still intergrated with sale of medical products, there id room for Article 59. There id a need to view Article 59 in a context, to differentiate circumstances, and to transform Article 59 into a vehicle of promoting new health care reform, rather than applying it mechanically and uncritically and making it become an obstacle to new reform. There is also a need to categorize several key factors, such as medical institutions, service-goods dichotomy, defects of products, medical products and liabilities relating to medical products, in order to alleviate impacts thst Article 59 has exerted om medical institutions.