知情与行为相分离情形下法人知情归责的认定
萧鑫知情与行为相分离情形下法人知情归责的认定
Determination of Knowledge Attribution to Legal Persons in Situation of Separation Between Knowledge and Behavior
期刊名称：《法学研究》
期刊年份：
作者：萧鑫
单位：
中文关键词：聚合知情归责;知情规范;法人归责规范;知情责任理论
英文关键词：collective knowledge attribution; knowledge-based rules; attribution rules of legal persons; the theory of knowledge responsibility
中文摘要：
法人运行中常会出现知情与行为相分离的情况，如何对法人进行知情归责，特别是能否进行聚合知情归责，是实践和理论中的重要问题。依据知情规范和法人归责规范内含的完整性原则，聚合知情归责并不可取。知行分离下法人知情归责的处理，根本上仍然需要基于一定的理由来确定法人合理的责任范围。就此而言，机关说和平等对待理论都存在根本性缺陷。知情责任理论将知行分离下知情归责的基础置于法人对信息组织义务的违反上，则更为妥当。但该理论本质上遵循了客观归责的思路，与明确排除“应当知道”的知情规范间存在内在冲突，需结合相关知情规范的涵摄范围、消极法律后果、客观归责适用的妥当性、可预期性以及司法政策等来加以协调。
英文摘要：
A legal person, as a labor-division organization, is often in a situation of separation between knowledge and behavior. How to carry out knowledge attribution to the legal person, especially whether it can be determined by the collective knowledge attribution doctrine in such situation, has become an important issue in practice and theory. According to the principle of integrity inherent in the knowledge-based rules and legal person attribution rules, the collective knowledge attribution doctrine itself is not desirable. The knowledge attribution to a legal person under the separation situation essentially still relies on the determination of the reasonable liability scope of the legal person based on certain reasons. In this regard, both the organ theory and the equal treatment theory are fundamentally flawed. The knowledge responsibility theory is more appropriate as it bases knowledge attribution in the event of separation on the violation by the legal person of its own obligation to be an informed organization. However, as this theory essentially follows the idea of negligence liability, it has an inherent conflict with the knowledge-based rules that explicitly exclude “should know”. To apply this theory in such situation, it is necessary to take into consideration such factors as the scope, the negative legal consequences, the appropriateness of negligence liability, the predictability of the outcome and the judicial policy of the relevant knowledge-based rules.
全文阅读： 点击下载
