工伤认定一般条款的建构路径
郑晓珊工伤认定一般条款的建构路径
Approaches to Constructing a General Clause on Determination of Industrial Injuries
期刊名称：《法学研究》
期刊年份：
作者：郑晓珊
单位：暨南大学法学院
中文关键词：工伤认定；一般条款；工作关联；48小时条款
英文关键词：identification of industrial injuries, general clause, workrelevance, the “48hour clause”
中文摘要：
在工伤认定的范围与标准上，《工伤保险条例》第14条先以伤害与工作之紧密关联为指引，形成类型化列举，后辅以“法律、行政法规规定应当认定为工伤的其他情形”作为兜底，形成“列举+兜底”的典型结构。但该兜底条款因缺少能够援引的对象而无法适用。最终使该条变为严格列举，时常因遗留漏洞而陷入过宽或过狭之困，亟需借一般条款之开放性、包容性来加以弥补、矫正。此一般条款，仍需以工作关联性为核心，既可采高度抽象的“大一般条款”模式，以“其他与工作密切相关的事故伤害或疾病”来替代现有兜底条款，同时解决拾遗补缺与整合资源两大难题；也可暂借《工伤保险条例》第14条第1项之动态化解释，形成要素确定型“小一般条款”。后者在基础性评价的清晰度以及要素涵盖的全面性、抽象性上略有不足，可做短期过渡使用。前述两种一般条款在具体适用时，均需对所有工作关联要素为整体考量，以其互动及总量平衡为基础做出判断。
英文摘要：
Taking the close relationship between injuries and work as guidance, Article 14 of the Regulations on WorkRelated Injury Insurance define the scope and standard of workrelated injuries through six paragraphs of typed enumerations, supplemented by one paragraph of miscellaneous provision, namely “other circumstances provided for in laws and administrative regulations under which workrelated injuries shall be ascertained”, thereby forming a typical structure of “enumeration + miscellaneous provision”. But unfortunately, this miscellaneous provision is useless in practice, as there is no relevant provision in other laws or administrative regulations to be invoked. As a result, Article 14 has become an article of strict enumeration, which is often faced with the dilemma of becoming either too wide or too narrow in its scope due to latent legal loopholes. To remedy this situation, a general clause with enough inclusiveness and flexibility is needed. This general clause should still take the workrelevance doctrine as its core and adopt one of the following two legislative modes: the highly abstract “big general clause mode”, which replaces the current miscellaneous provision with “other workrelated injuries and diseases”, thereby remedying the loopholes and integrating existing legal resources at the same time; and the “small general clause mode”, which establishes the key elements of workrelated injuries and illnesses through the dynamical interpretation of Article 14 Paragraph 1 of the Regulations. Although the later has some shortcomings in terms the clarity of basic evaluation, comprehensiveness of the coverage and abstractness, it is still suitable for shortterm use. In the concrete application of either of the above two modes of general cause, it is necessary to take into overall consideration of all workrelated elements, and make decision on the basis of their interactions and overall balance.
全文阅读： 点击下载
