英语翻译美国侵权法中的严格责任源自英国,现已成为大陆法学者时常使用的概念.并已融入欧洲国家侵权法归责原则体系中.近年来,严格责任适用的范围有日趋扩大的倾向.严格责任是基于对

英语翻译美国侵权法中的严格责任源自英国,现已成为大陆法学者时常使用的概念.并已融入欧洲国家侵权法归责原则体系中.近年来,严格责任适用的范围有日趋扩大的倾向.严格责任是基于对
英语翻译
美国侵权法中的严格责任源自英国,现已成为大陆法学者时常使用的概念.并已融入欧洲国家侵权法归责原则体系中.近年来,严格责任适用的范围有日趋扩大的倾向.严格责任是基于对安全的绝对义务的违反,虽然当是人已尽到最谨慎的注意,但任要对其行为引起的损害承担责任.对严格责任的抗辩非常有限,合理注意不在其中.严格责任最经常适用于异常危险活动或产品责任案件中.
严格责任的本质特征
（一）严格责任的非过错性
严格责任无疑是继过错责任后所出现的新的里程碑.它的问世使过错因素不再是确定责任人承担责任的最终依据,这有利于保护无辜的受害人和弱势群体.
（二）严格责任的危险性
综观各国侵权法,严格责任不免都与危险性联系在一起.大陆法系国家德国称严格责任为危险责任.有学者将就将危险责任与英美法的严格责任等同.在法国同样以危险活动作为运用严格责任的基础.[20]但实际上英美侵权法中,严格责任除了适用于动物引起的侵权、劳工赔偿、产品责任等之外,大多数情况也是适用于异常危险活动造成的损害.
（三）严格责任的归责性
在过错责任中加害人对其产生的损害,之所以要负赔偿责任是因为行为人具有道德上的可非难性.但严格责任行为人无过错,仍要负赔偿责任,其归责性依据耐人寻味.而20世纪上半叶西方最有影响的法学家之一庞德从维护社会一般安全义务出发,论证了严格责任的合理性.他认为从19世纪后期开始,法律着重于社会利益而不是个人利益的保护.
（四）严格责任的因果性
由于过错在过错责任构成中是最终决定要件,是决定过错责任能否成立的关键.在严格责任的构成要件中,不考虑加害人过错的有无.因此,因果关系具有更重要的意义,它是严格责任构成要件的最终要件.在严格责任中只有因果关系与损害两个要件,即原告只要通过证明因果关系和所受损害这两个因素就可以获得救济.
（五）严格责任的举证倒置性
严格责任是基于安全的绝对义务的违反,无论被告是否尽到最谨慎的注意义务,只要损害发生就应承担责任,如被告不能提出合理地抗辩理由（且抗辩理由相当有限）,则就不能免除责任,即原告的举证责任部分地转移到被告身上,原告只须就因果关系和所受损害举证就已足矣.
（六）严格责任中的抗辩受限性
1、由于第三人行为、动物行为及自然力量引起损害不能成为抗辩事由.
2、受害人过失不能作为抗辩的理由.
3、受害的人、物及动物的异常敏感性可以作为抗辩理由.
4、履行公共职责可以作为抗辩理由.
对严格责任的评析
（一）实用性：美国侵权法植根于实用主义哲学的土壤,崇尚以人为中心,主张认识与人的经验不可分离,强调理论与实践的统一.在此基础上的判例法体系是法官经验式的智慧与逻辑推理结合的产物.而源于判例法的严格责任历经嬗变,其适用的范围日趋扩大,这种事实本身就证明了该规则具有活力和实用性.
（二）超越性：不管学者们对严格责任等同于何种责任见解各异,但毋庸置疑,它超越了法国法的“过错推定责任”以及德国法的“危险责任”,并冲破了以抽象思辩和逻辑严谨见长的大陆法系侵权法理论体系的藩篱,让一元化归责原则体系向二元化或多元化归责原则体系发展,从而对世界各国的立法产生了深远的影响.
（三）公正性：严格责任强调行为人和受害人实现利益的平衡,体现了保护弱者代替平等保护的新观念,并藉此实现了实质上的公正.这一点在产品责任和劳工赔偿领域尤其显得突出.

英语翻译美国侵权法中的严格责任源自英国,现已成为大陆法学者时常使用的概念.并已融入欧洲国家侵权法归责原则体系中.近年来,严格责任适用的范围有日趋扩大的倾向.严格责任是基于对
American tort law of strict liability from the United Kingdom, has now become the mainland legal scholars often use the concept. European countries have been integrated into the principles of tort law system of Liability. In recent years, the scope of strict liability for the widening trend. Strict liability is based on the absolute obligation of security breach, although when it is done to the most careful of people's attention, but any damage caused by their actions and take responsibility. Defense against strict liability is very limited, reasonable care not among them. Strict liability for abnormally dangerous most frequent activity or product liability cases.
　　The essential characteristics of strict liability
　　(A) the fault of the non-strict liability
　　Strict liability is undoubtedly the responsibility of following the fault which occurred after a new milestone. It is the advent of the fault is to determine the factors responsible is no longer the ultimate basis for liability, which is conducive to protecting the innocent victims and vulnerable groups.
　　(B) the risk of strict liability
　　Looking at national tort law, strict liability and risk are inevitably linked. German civil law countries, said strict liability for hazardous duty. Some scholars would risk liability and strict liability common law equivalent. Similarly in France the use of a dangerous activity as the basis of strict liability. [20] but in fact Anglo-American tort law, strict liability apply to animals in addition to causing the infringement, workers compensation, product liability, the most unusual is for harm caused by hazardous activities.
　　(C) Strict Liability of
　　Offenders in their fault liability for damage arising in, the reason is because the liability of the perpetrator can be a moral disapproval of. However, the perpetrator of strict liability without fault, will still be liable, the attribution of the basis for intriguing. The western half of the 20th century's most influential jurists of Pond from the maintenance of social security obligations generally off, demonstrates the rationality of strict liability. He believes that since the late 19th century, the legal interests of the community rather than focus on the protection of personal interests.
　　(D) strict liability causality
　　Responsibility for the fault is the fault element of the final decision is to determine whether the establishment of the key fault liability. In the composition of the elements of strict liability, regardless of whether the offender's fault. Therefore, the causal relationship has more significance, it is the ultimate constituent elements of strict liability element. Strict liability in the causation and damage are only two elements, namely, proof of causation by the plaintiff as long as the damage to these two factors and can get relief.
　　(E) of strict liability Juzhengdaozhi
　　Strict liability is based on the absolute security breach of its obligations, regardless of whether the defendant to do the duty of care to the most cautious, as long as it should be responsible for the damage occurred, if the defendant can not be reasonable to defense (and defense is very limited), you can not remove responsibility, that is part of the plaintiff's burden of proof shifted to the defendant, the plaintiff only to prove causation and damage had been sufficient.
　　(F) defense of strict liability in the Restrictive
　　1, the third behavior, animal behavior and the forces of nature cause damage can not be the defenses.
　　2, the victim can not be the fault of defense.
　　3, the victims of people, things and animals, abnormal sensitivity can be used as defense.
　　4, the performance of public duties as defense.
　　Comment on the strict liability
　　(A) availability: American tort law is rooted in the philosophy of pragmatism in the soil, advocating people-centered, knowledge and human experience claims can not be separated, emphasizing the unity of theory and practice. On this basis, the case law system is the empirical wisdom of judges and logical reasoning with the product. The strict liability from the case law through evolution, widening the scope of its application, this fact itself proves the rule dynamic and practical.
　　(B) Transcendence: whether scholars have the responsibility of strict liability is equivalent to what different opinions, but no doubt that it goes beyond the French law "presumption of fault liability" and the German law, "dangerous duty," and broke through to abstract known for speculative and logically coherent system of civil law tort theory of barriers to a unified system to a dual responsibility principle or the principle of diversity attributable to system development, and thus the world had a profound influence legislation.
　　(C) justice: perpetrators and victims of strict liability emphasized to achieve a balance of interests, reflecting the protection of the weak instead of the new concept of equal protection, and to achieve substantial justice. This is in the field of product liability and workers compensation in particular stands out.
　　要悬赏分呀!