消費者保護法上商品與服務責任之實務發展

The Recent Development of Product and Service Liability in Taiwanese Consumer Protection Law

我國實務從社會活動安全義務的角度，課予企業經營者應依消費者保護法第7條規定，確保其營業環境及附屬設施具備安全性。此義務性質殆為結果義務，乃無免責事由之無過失責任，若認為稍顯過重，可參酌民法第606條與第607條但書規定，考慮以不可抗力作為業者之免責事由。此外，消費者保護法第51條懲罰性賠償金之請求權人，宜限於消費者。如其死亡，則肯認實務以繼承人或遺產管理人作為請求主體之見解，並採目的性限縮方法，將因可歸責業者之事故致消費者當場死亡之情形，從民法第6條文義射程內剔除，使消費者保護法第7條第3項之填補性損害賠償請求權在支撐死者之繼承人得依同法第51條請求懲罰性賠償金之必要範圍內，不因消費者死亡而消滅，且請求之範圍包括財產上與非財產上損害。

From the perspective of social activity safety obligations, Taiwan supreme Court imposes that business operators should ensure the safety of their business environment and auxiliary facilities in accordance with Article 7 of Taiwanese Consumer Protection Law. The nature of this obligation is almost an obligation of result, and it belongs to a no-fault liability with no reason for exemption. In addition, the right to claim punitive damages in Article 51 of Taiwanese Consumer Protection Law should be limited to a consumer, not accessible to a third party. In case of his death, it is affirmed that the heir or the administrator of the estate is the subject of the request in practice, and the scope of the request should include property and non-property damages.