The Security Guaranty Liability of Customer Service Facility Operators in Roman Law and Its Reception and Development in Modern Law
- 法学院－已发表论文 
古罗马的客服设施包括船舶、客栈、车马店三种,公元前2世纪,裁判官颁布告示,在把财物交给这些设施的经营人保管的情况下被盗时授予旅客对抗此等经营人的诉权,课加他们严格责任,按准私犯定性他们的行为。尔后,法学家不断扩张这一告示的适用范围,从而达成了对旅客财产的更完善保护。现代国家在民法典或商法典中继受了这一制度,并进一步扩张其适用范围,使其涵盖对旅客人身安全的承保。但多数国家把客服设施经营人的责任改为合同责任,按照紧急寄托处理,并设定了经营人责任的上限。我国关于客服设施经营人对旅客人身和财产承担的保全责任采用经验型立法方式,十分零碎,漏洞很多,而且采用过错责任,对旅客的保护强度不够。而继受型立法可以继承先驱者的经验,少走弯路,故未来民法典宜在客服设施经营人的承保责任问题上采用继受型立法模式,并课加经营人严格责任。In ancient Rome,the customer service facilities include ship,hotel,stable. In the 2nd century BC,one praetor issued an edictum,and awarded passenger action against operator of the facilities when the property that they hand over to above- said operator for custody was stolen,making them to assume a strict liability,qualifying their actions as quasi delictum. Then,the jurists expanded constantly the scope of application so as to reach a more perfect protection to the property of passengers.Modern countries received this system or in the civil code or in the commercial code,and further expanded its scope of application so that it covers the personal safety of the passengers. But in most countries,the customer service facility operator＇s responsibility is viewed as a contract liability,dealing with it in the frame of emergency deposit,and setting the upper limit of liability of operators. China made legislation about the liability of safety of personal and property of customer service facility operator in experience way,and in fragmental way,so they have many loopholes,furthermore they only made the above- said operator assume a fault liability,resulting in an insufficient strength for protection of passengers. Meanwhile a legislation in way of reception may inherit the experience of pioneers and go less detours. Therefore,the future civil code of China should use the reception legislation pattern,making the operator assume a strict liability.