Restatement of the Law，Third，Torts by The American Law Institute

　　美国法学会《侵权法 第三次重述》

　　Part One: Intoduction of Torts 侵权法概述

　　Part Two： Apportionment of Liability(Rule Sections)第一部分：责任分担

　　Part Three: Products Liability 产品责任

　　Part One: Intoduction of Torts 侵权法概述

　　在美国，侵权法主要属于各州的法律范畴，而且主要由判例法组成。侵权行为可分为故意侵权行为(intentional tort)、过失侵权行为(negligence or negligent tort)和严格责任侵权行为 (strict liability tort). 对侵权行为的一般救济方法是对侵权行为所造成的损害予以一定的金钱补偿，在涉及交通事故等领域的侵权赔偿已广范采用了保险赔偿的方式。

　　Part One: Introduction 基本概念

　　1. The law of tort is still the source of most civil suits in the United States, with damage claims for automobile accidents taking first place. Many circumstances contribute to this: (a) the plaintiff in an American civil suit is ordinarily entitled to try his claim before a jury which will often--and understandably--rely more on human than on legal considerations, for instance when a child has been injured in an automobile accident or through a defective product of a large enterprise; (b) Compensation and damages include not only the actual loss but also the intangible damage. A plaintiff can therefore often play on the human reaction of the jury: for instance, what is appropriate compensation for a permanent disability such as the loss of a limb? (c) American law permits the participation of the attorney in the plaintiff’s recovery (contingent fee) which not uncommonly amounts to 25 to 33 percent of the verdict. As a result of all of these factors, a tort action may be a lengthy proceeding, result in large expenses, for instance through honoraria for experts (which may deter the "small "plaintiff from suing at all), and may end in the award of a very large verdict. It is no linger uncommon that a jury will aware a verdict in excess of $100,000. These conditions have been the touchstone for several reform endeavors which will be discussed in more detail below.

　　在美国，侵权行为法产生的诉讼仍是大多民事诉讼案件的主要来源，其中基于交通事故产生的损害赔偿案件居于首位。很多因素造成了这一现象：(a)在美国民事诉讼案件中的原告通常利用法律赋予他的诉讼权利主张赔偿，因为陪审团更多的是基于可以理解的人性考虑而非法律考虑，例如当一个孩子在一起交通事故或因购买大公司的瑕疵产品而受到伤害往往能得到陪审团的同情理解。(b)补偿费和损害赔偿金不仅包括实际的损害而且包括了无形损害。原告经常可以利用陪审团的人性反应：比如，当永久的失去肢体时怎样才算是一个适当的赔偿金额。(c)美国法律允许律师分享原告所获得的赔偿金(胜诉酬金)。这种酬金达到法院判付赔偿金金额的百分之二十五到百分之三十的情况并非罕见。由于以上所有因素的存在，在侵权案件中若想获得巨额的赔偿金必将经历一个冗长的审判过程。这方面的一个例子是在陪审团对一个重大的侵权案件做出裁决后，专家(证人)的酬金可能是渺小的原告所获得的损害赔偿金的全部。陪审团做出一个超过100，000美元的裁决已不再是不可能的，而是极其常见的。这些因素都将成为若干改革努力的试金石，我们将在下文中更多的讨论其细节。

　　2. Tort law and the law of contracts often overlap since an injured party frequently has the choice between a tort claim(for instance, unauthorized use of property--conversion--or personal injury)and a suit in contract, for instance, in implied contract or, in the case of personal injuries, for breach of warranty. Since the law of torts permits the recovery of intangible damage (which is usually not the case with respect to contract claims), the plaintiff will ordinarily choose the tort claim for personal injuries when the facts so permit.

　　侵权行为法常常与合同法产生竞合，受损害的一方也常常在侵权之诉(例如将未经授权使用的财产转移和因非法占有他人财产所造成的个人损害)和违约之诉中做出选择。比如，在格式合同及在个人损害赔偿案件中或因为违反保证诺言的案例中。因为侵权行为法还将赔偿无形损失(而违约责任往往不赔偿无形的损失)，因为侵权行为法如此的规定，在现实生活中原告往往选择它提起个人损害赔偿。

　　3. Everyone is liable for his tortious act, in limited form also children (however, parents only then when they acted as the child’s agent or did not comply with their duty to supervise), but not the state unless express statutory provision has abolished state immunity.

　　每个人都要对其侵权行为承担责任，在有限的形式下儿童亦然(但是，父母仅当其作为该儿童之代理人或未能按照其监护义务行事时才负此责任)，但国家不在此例，除非法律明确规定取消了国家的豁免权。

　　4. Everyone is protected against tortious acts, including the embryo. The heirs or next of kin may have a damage claim for the intentional or negligent death of their relative or testator (wrongful death action).The statutes of some States provide protection, and a tort claim, to third parties for injuries arising out of the intoxication of the tortfeasor; under these so-called "dram-shop acts", a party injured as a result of the intoxication of the tortfeasor has a claim against him who contributed to the tortfeasor's intoxication.

　　每个人包括婴儿都受到侵权法的保护。 继承人或近亲属可以提起损害赔偿之诉，当其被继承人或近亲属被故意或过失导致死亡时(非正常死亡之诉)。一些州的法律规定，对于第三方的行为使侵权行为人醉酒从而导致受害人受伤的可以提起侵权之诉，这些规定被称为小酒店法令，作为侵权行为人醉酒之结果而受到伤害的一方有权向那些造成该侵权行为人醉酒的人提出索赔请求。

　　5. Finally it should be emphasized again that the law of torts is, in the main, State Law.

　　最后需要强调的是侵权行为法主要是各州的立法。

　　Part Two: Intentional Torts 故意侵权

　　The case law contains the usual catalogue of intentional torts. For instance: battery, assault, conversion of property, false imprisonment, trespass to personal and real property. Some torts, for instance, alienation of affection have been abolished by statute in many States. Others, such as defamation, have recently been modified significantly through constitutional case law. New torts, unknown to the traditional common law, have also been introduced by the case law; particularly important among them are the torts for invasion of privacy and for products liability.

　　以往的判例包含了各类故意侵权。例如殴打、故意伤害、非法占有他人财产、非法拘禁和对动产和不动产权的侵犯。一些侵权行为，例如破坏他人夫妻关系在很多的州的法律中都被废除了。另外一些，例如诽谤，最近就在宪法判例法中得到显著的修改。判例法也增加了一些传统的普通法所未包含的新的侵权行为;其中特别重要的是侵犯隐私权的行为和产品责任侵权行为。

　　Part Three: Liability for Negligence 过失侵权责任

　　Tort liability for negligence presupposes causality between the negligent act and the injury to person or property. A person is negligent if he has not complied with his "duty of care" and, seen objectively, has not acted as "a reasonable and prudent man." The latter test takes into account the special professional qualification of the tortfeasor. Thus, different criteria apply, say, to an architect than for a construction worker, the case law has given a restrictive interpretation to the concept of "duty of care. The duty must be owed toward the particular plaintiff: there is no duty of care to the public at large. Thus, a lesser duty of care is owed to him who trespasses on property than to an incited guest. Some State statutes go even further and exclude, for instance, a duty of care by the driver of a motor vehicle--toward passengers whom he transports gratuitously (guest statutes). Even if a duty of care exists and has not been observed, the injured party may still not have a claim for compensation. This will be the case, for instance, when he has been guilty of contributory. This will be the case, for instance, when he has been guilty of contributory negligence or has assumed the rise, the harshness of the contributory negligence defense, the result of which would not only be a deduction from the compensation but exclude any liability on the part of the tortfeasor has been softened in some States by adoption of the "comparative negligence" doctrine. It requires that the respective degree of negligence of both parties be determined and compensation assessed accordingly. The bar of the contributory negligence defense to a recovery may furthermore be excluded by the doctrine of the "last clear chance", according to which even the contributory negligent plaintiff will be compensated if he can prove that the defendant had the "last clear chance" to prevent the damage.

　　过失侵权责任以过失行为和对人身或财产的侵害之间的因果关系为前提要件。一个人若没有尽到其注意义务就被认为是有过失的。客观地讲，他没有像一个理性且谨慎的人那样行为。最新的修正案中包含了特殊行业侵权行为所该承担的责任。这样，比方说对一名建筑师就要适用不同于一名建筑工人的标准。判例法已经对注意义务给出了限制性解释。这种责任必定属于特殊的原告而非普通的社会大众。这样，一个人对于非法进入其土地者所负有的照看义务就小于其邀请的客人。一些州的侵权立法发展得更加迅速，例如，对于免费搭乘乘客的司机的照看义务做出了规定。即使司机未尽到小心与观察的义务，受害一方仍不能主张赔偿请求。下面就是一个因共同过失或承担风险而获罪的案例。共同过失辩护的严格性，其结果并不是减少赔偿数额而是完全排除侵权行为人的责任，已经因一些州采用了比较过失原则而得到减弱。比较过失原则又可译为相对过失原则，即通过比较双方的过失来确定双方的责任。该原则要求共同过失的双方基于造成的损害程度来确定赔偿数额。该法令的贡献在于过失侵权的赔偿责任可能因为最后明显机会原则得到排除，有过失的原告可能得到赔偿，如果它能够证明被告因最后明显机会原则而避免损害。

　　The extraordinarily complex law of negligence--with its difficulties of proof in a jury trial and the possibility that a jury sympathetic to the plaintiff will let him win despite his contributory negligence but consider the latter in its calculation of damages--today leads to two, sometimes inconsistent, efforts of reform. One would provide for strict liability in many cases, the other would introduce a system of compensation for the injured without regard to fault, resembling a form of insurance. The following section briefly reviews these two trends.

　　过失侵权法极其复杂，因为在庭审过程中很难避免陪审团对原告产生同情从而不考虑原告的过错也不考虑接下来的损失计算。如今对此现象可以从两方面努力进行改革，尽管有时这两者不相一致。一方面可以在很多案件中规定严格责任，另一方面可以创设一种不考虑过错的赔偿制度，例如类似保险制度的形式。下面的章节将简要评论这两种立法趋势。

　　Part Four: Tort Law Reform: Strict Liability and No-Fault

　　侵权法改革：严格责任和无过错责任

　　a. Strict Liability 严格责任

　　Originally, strict liability existed only in a few special cases, for instance with respect to the maintenance of dangerous animals, defamation, and by way of a rebuttable presumption, known as the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, which deduced fault or negligence from the nature of the thing or act itself, such as defective construction or negligent use.

　　首先，严格责任只存在于几种特殊情形，比如饲养危险动物、诽谤，通过一个被称之为不言自明法则的可反驳之推定，从事实或行为本身的性质推定过错或者过失，例如施工缺陷或者是疏忽使用。

　　Beginning with the use of contract law concepts, particularly that of warranty which permits suit either based on contract or on tort and thus obvious the need to show negligence, the more recent case law recognizes strict liability in the area of product liability. This new tort claim no longer derives from contract law notions but has become independent; the liability of a seller today extends to all "dangerous products, without regard to whether the issue concerns the product itself or its packaging. Dangerous products include products in a defective condition which are "unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer or to his property, In this context," defective" means that the product does not meet the reasonable expectations of the ordinary consumer concerning the safety of the product. Everyone is protected whom the seller "should expect to be endangered by the product's probable use. In view of the extensive interstate commerce in the United States, this formula, for all practical purposes, extends protection to the public in general.

　　从合同法概念的作用说起，尤其是在合同或侵权中提供担保可以避免出现过失，更多的近期判例法承认在产品责任领域的严格责任。这一新的侵权主张不再依据合同法主张从而独立存在：销售商的责任如今扩大到所有危险产品，而不在乎是产品本身的问题还是包装问题。危险产品包括产品在有缺陷的条件下对使用者或消费者或其财产有不合理的危险。在此，缺陷一词意指该产品未达到一般消费者关于该产品安全性能的合理期望标准。销售商应该预见到会由于对该产品的恰当使用而带来危险的每一个人均受保护。纵观美国各州，在所有现实目的中这个定律总体扩大了对社会公众的保护。

　　b. No-Fault 无过错责任

　　The trend to strict liability in the area of products liability should be contrasted with another reform endeavor which seeks to find more just solutions for ordinary claims based on negligence, particularly with respect to the great number of automobile accidents. These reform endeavors which are based, in the main, on the plan of Professors Keeton and O'Connell seek to abolish the fault principle in tort law and to award compensation without proof of fault according to insurance principles. This notion has already proved very successful in those States which so far have adopted No Fault statutes. Experience in those jurisdictions shows persons could be compensated. Nevertheless, compensation for losses resulting from automobile accidents and products liability remains a problem of overwhelming dimensions: losses amount to over five billion dollars a year but only 800 million dollars in insurance proceeds are available for their compensation. As claims arising out of products liability have steadily increased, the cost of liability insurance to manufacturers also increased from 25 million in 1950 to 125 million in 1970. Further reform movements, albeit at this time only in their infancy, seek to extend the No-Fault principle to almost all claims, principally to products liability, but also to other kinds of liability such as medical malpractice. In a No-Fault system, a manufacturer agrees--and insures himself accordingly to grant compensation for certain injuries without proof of fault. "Compensation in this context means compensation for actual losses, but not for intangible damage. Thus, liability will be limited for the manufacturer and will therefore require a relatively lesser insurance premium to cover the rise. On the other hand, the injured person will be in a better positon, compared to traditional tort law, since he will be entitled to receive immediate compensation for his actual loss (expenses loss of profits or wages) without lengthy litigation or difficult proof of fault.

　　产品责任适用严格责任的趋势应当与另外一种改革努力相比较，就是为了因过失提起的主张，特别是大量的机动车事故，力求寻找更多解决措施。这些主要建立在基顿和奥康内尔两位教授之方案基础上的改革努力试图取消侵权法中的过错责任原则并按照保险原则在不要过错证明(无过错)的情况下给予与赔偿。在目前采用无过错责任制度的国家，已经证明了这一主张非常成功。司法实践表明，当很大部分受害者能得到赔偿时可以降低保险费。然而，机动车事故和产品责任引起的损害赔偿仍然是压倒性多数的严重问题。每年超过50亿美元的损失数额却只有8亿美元保险收益可以用来赔偿。鉴于因产品责任引起的侵权主张稳定增长，生产者的保险责任花费(保险费)也从1950年的2500万美元增加到1970年的1.25亿美元。进一步的改革运动，尽管目前只在初步阶段，试图将无过错责任原则扩大到几乎所有的诉求，主要是产品责任，但是也包括其他的责任，例如医疗事故。在无过错责任体系中，生产者同意并且据此保证其自身在某些伤害中无须证明过错而承认赔偿。在此赔偿意指实际损失赔偿，而不包括无形的损害。因此，生产者的责任将会受到限制，这样就要求相对较少的保险费以涵盖这种风险。另一方面，相较传统的侵权法，受害者能处于更有利的地位，因为其有权因其实际损失(花费、收益损失或者薪资)取得立即赔偿，而不用通过长时间的诉讼，也没有证明过错的困难。

　　Part Two： Apportionment of Liability(Rule Sections)第二部分：责任分担

　　第一题：比较责任的基本规则Topic 1- Basic Rules of Comparative Responsibility

　　1 Issues and Causes of Action Addressed by This Restatement

　　第一条 本重述所涉及的问题与诉因

　　This Restatement addresses issues of apportioning liability among two or more persons. It applies to all claims[3] (including lawsuits and settlements) for death, personal injury (including emotional distress or consortium), or physical damage to tangible property, regardless of the basis of liability.

　　本重述讨论在两位或多位责任人之间分配责任的问题。本重述适用于关于死亡、人身损害[2](包括精神损害或配偶权)，或对有形财产的物理伤害的所有主张(包括法律诉讼与和解)，无论其责任基础如何。

　　2 Contractual Limitations on Liability第二条 责任的合同性限制

　　When permitted by contract law, substantive law governing the claim, and applicable rules of construction, a contract between the plaintiff and another person absolving the person from liability for future harm bars the plaintiff,s recovery[4] from that person for the harm. Unlike a plaintiff,s negligence, a valid contractual limitation on liability does not provide an occasion for the factfinder to assign a percentage of responsibility to any party or other person.

　　在合同法、诉讼请求的实体法规则和可适用的解释规则允许的情况下，原告与他人之间免除该他人对未来伤害负责的合同，将阻碍原告从该他人处获得对该伤害的赔偿。与原告的过失不同，一项有效的合同性责任限制并不构成事实调查人向任何当事人或他人分配责任份额的理由。

　　3 Ameliorative Doctrines for Defining Plaintiff’s Negligence Abolished

　　第三条 定义原告过失的各种严格学说均已被废止

　　Plaintiff,s negligence is defined by the applicable standard for a defendant,s negligence. Special ameliorative doctrines for defining plaintiff,s negligence are abolished.

　　原告的过失应依据适用于被告过失的标准来定义。特别适用于定义原告过失的各种严格学说均已被废止。

　　4 Proof of Plaintiff’s Negligence and Legal Causation

　　The defendant has the burden to prove plaintiff,s negligence, and may use any of the methods a plaintiff may use to prove defendant,s negligence. Except as otherwise provided in Topic 5, the defendant also has the burden to prove that the plaintiff,s negligence, if any, was a legal cause of the plaintiff,s damages.

　　第四条 对原告过失和法律原因的证明

　　被告负有证明原告过失的举证责任，并可采用原告为证明被告过失可以采用的任何方法。除本重述第五题另有规定外，被告亦负有举证责任证明原告过失如果原告存在任何过失构成原告所受损害的一项法律原因。

　　5 Negligence Imputed to a Plaintiff第五条 可归责于原告的过失

　　The negligence of another person is imputed to a plaintiff whenever the negligence of the other person would have been imputed had the plaintiff been a defendant, except the negligence of another person is not imputed to a plaintiff solely because of the plaintiff,s ownership of a motor vehicle or permission for its use by the other person.

　　假设原告是被告的角色，他人的过失便可以归责于他的话，那么该他人的过失可归责于原告。除非该他人的过失不是仅仅因为原告对机动车享有的所有权，或对该他人使用该机动车的许可而归责于原告。

　　6 Negligence Imputed to a Plaintiff When the Plaintiff,s Recovery Derives from a Claim That the Defendant Committed a Tort Against a Third Person and in Claims Under Survival Statutes

　　第六条 当原告获得的赔偿派生于一项被告对第三人实施了侵权行为的主张和包含于基于遗存诉因法的主张时，过失可归责于原告

　　(a) When a plaintiff asserts a claim that derives from the defendant,s tort against a third person, negligence of the third person is imputed to the plaintiff with respect to that claim. The plaintiff,s recovery is also reduced by the plaintiff,s own negligence.

　　(b) The negligence of an estate,s decedent affects the estate[8],s recovery under a survival statute to the same extent that it would have affected the decedent,s recovery had the decedent survived. The negligence of a beneficiary of the decedent,s estate is not imputed to the estate merely because of the beneficiary,s status as a beneficiary.

　　(a)当原告声称一项派生于被告对第三人实施侵权行为的主张时，在该项主张中该第三人的过失可归责于原告。原告的赔偿额同样因为其自身的过失而被减少。

　　(b)根据遗存诉因法，遗产被继承人[7](生前)的过失在其生存时对其赔偿额影响的同样范围内，影响遗产可获得的赔偿额。遗产受益人的过失不能仅仅因为受益人作为受益人的法律地位而归责于财产。

　　7 Effect of Plaintiff’s Negligence When Plaintiff Suffers an Indivisible Injury

　　第七条 在原告遭受不可分损害时原告过失[9]的效力

　　Plaintiff,s negligence (or the negligence of another person for whose negligence the plaintiff is responsible) that is a legal cause of an indivisible injury to the plaintiff reduces the plaintiff,s recovery in proportion to the share of responsibility the factfinder assigns to the plaintiff (or other person for whose negligence the plaintiff is responsible).

　　若原告的过失(或原告应为其过失负责的其他人的过失)构成原告遭受的不可分伤害的一项法律原因，则原告的所获得的赔偿额将依据事实调查人分配给原告(或原告应为其过失负责的该他人)的责任份额相应比例地减少。

　　8 Factors for Assigning Shares of Responsibility第八条 分配责任份额时应考虑的因素

　　Factors for assigning percentages of responsibility to each person whose legal responsibility has been established include

　　(a) the nature of the person,s risk-creating conduct, including any awareness or indifference with respect to the risks created by the conduct and any intent with respect to the harm created by the conduct; and

　　(b) the strength of the causal connection between the person,s risk-creating conduct and the harm.

　　向法律责任已被确定的各方分配责任百分比时应考虑的因素包括：

　　(a)该方造成风险之行为的性质，包括任何对该行为所造成风险的认识或漠视，以及任何对该行为所造成伤害的意图;及

　　(b)该方造成风险之行为与该伤害之间因果关系的强度。

　　9 Offsetting Judgments第九条 判决的抵销

　　If two parties are liable to each other in the same suit, each party is entitled to a setoff of any recovery owed by the other party, except that, in cases in which one or both of the parties has liability insurance, setoff does not reduce the payment of a liability insurer unless an applicable rule of law or statute[10] so provides.

　　如果同一诉讼中的双方当事人都相互负有责任，那么各方都有权抵消对方享有的任何(相应)赔偿额;除非一方或双方都有责任保险，那么抵消不会减少责任保险人应支付的金额，适用的法律规范或制定法另有规定的除外。

　　Topic 2- Liability of Multiple Tortfeasors for Indivisible Harm

　　第二题：数个侵权行为人对不可分伤害的责任

　　10 Effect of Joint and Several Liability第十条 连带责任的效力

　　When, under applicable law, some persons are jointly and severally liable to an injured person, the injured person may sue for and recover the full amount of recoverable damages from any jointly and severally liable person.

　　当依据适用的法律，有多人对某一受害人承担连带责任时，该受害人可以起诉任一负连带责任者并从该人处获得可获得的全部损害赔偿[12]。

　　11 Effect of Several Liability第十一条 单独责任的效力

　　When, under applicable law, a person is severally liable to an injured person for an indivisible injury, the injured person may recover only the severally liable person,s comparative-responsibility share of the injured person,s damages.

　　当依据适用的法律，某人对受害人的不可分损害承担单独责任时，该受害人仅可以获得该负单独责任者在该受害人应得赔偿额中的比较责任份额。

　　12 Intentional Tortfeasors第十二条 故意侵权行为人

　　Each person who commits a tort that requires intent is jointly and severally liable for any indivisible injury legally caused by the tortious conduct.

　　每个实施以故意为要件的侵权行为的人，均应对该侵权行为作为法律原因造成的任何不可分损害承担连带责任。

　　13 Vicarious Liability第十三条 替代责任

　　A person whose liability is imputed based on the tortious acts of another is liable for the entire share of comparative responsibility assigned to the other, regardless of whether joint and several liability or several liability is the governing rule for independent tortfeasors who cause an indivisible injury.

　　无论对导致不可分损害的独立侵权行为人适用的规则是连带责任或者单独责任，基于他人侵权性的行为而承担责任的人，对分配给该他人的整个比较责任份额承担责任。

　　14 Tortfeasors Liable for Failure to Protect the Plaintiff from the Specific Risk of an Intentional Tort

　　第十四条 未就某一故意侵权行为的具体风险对原告提供保护而承担责任的侵权行为人

　　A person who is liable to another based on a failure to protect the other from the specific risk of an intentional tort is jointly and severally liable for the share of comparative responsibility assigned to the intentional tortfeasor in addition to the share of comparative responsibility assigned to the person.

　　因未就某一故意侵权行为的具体风险对他人提供保护而承担责任的一方，应在分配给他的比较责任份额之外，对分配给故意侵权行为人的比较责任份额承担连带责任。

　　15 Persons Acting in Concert第十五条 共同行为人

　　When persons are liable because they acted in concert, all persons are jointly and severally liable for the share of comparative responsibility assigned to each person engaged in concerted activity.

　　当多人因共同行为而承担责任时，所有各方应对分配给参与该共同行为的每一方的比较责任份额承担连带责任。

　　16 Effect of Partial Settlement on Jointly and Severally Liable Tortfeasors’ Liability

　　第十六条对连带责任人之责任所做部分和解的效力

　　The plaintiff,s recoverable damages from a jointly and severally liable tortfeasor are reduced by the comparative share of damages attributable to a settling tortfeasor who otherwise would have been liable for contribution to jointly and severally liable defendants who do not settle. The settling tortfeasor,s comparative share of damages is the percentage of comparative responsibility assigned to the settling tortfeasor multiplied by the total damages of the plaintiff.

　　原告可从一负连带责任的侵权行为人处获得的赔偿应减去应分配给另一已和解，否则将对负连带责任的其他未和解被告承担分摊责任的侵权行为人的比较赔偿份额。该已和解侵权行为人的比较赔偿份额是分配给该已和解侵权行为人的比较责任份额与原告赔偿总额的乘积。

　　17 Joint and Several or Several Liability for Independent Tortfeasors

　　第十七条 独立侵权行为人的连带责任或单独责任

　　If the independent tortious conduct of two or more persons is a legal cause of an indivisible injury, the law of the applicable jurisdiction determines whether those persons are jointly and severally

　　如有两人或多人的独立侵权行为构成某一不可分损害的法律原因，将由该案司法管辖区的法律确定这些侵权人应否承担连带责任、单独责任或连带责任与单独责任的某种混合责任形态。

　　liable, severally liable, or liable under some hybrid of joint and several and several liability.

　　Track A - Joint and Several Liability路径A：连带责任

　　A18 Liability of Multiple Tortfeasors for Indivisible Harm

　　If the independent tortious conduct of two or more persons is a legal cause of an indivisible injury, each person is jointly and severally liable for the recoverable damages caused by the tortious conduct.

　　A路径第18条 数个侵权行为人对不可分伤害的责任

　　如果两个或两个以上的共同侵权行为构成一不可分损害的法律原因，那么每个人均对该侵权行为造成的可获得损害赔偿承担连带责任。

　　A19 Assignment of Responsibility: Jointly and Severally Liable Defendants

　　If one defendant and at least one other party or settling tortfeasor may be found by the factfinder to have engaged in tortious conduct that was a legal cause of an indivisible injury, each such party and settling tortfeasor is submitted to the factfinder for assignment of a percentage of comparative responsibility.

　　A路径第19条 责任分配：负连带责任的被告

　　如果一个被告和至少另一方当事人或者和解侵权行为人可能被事实调查人确认曾经参与了作为一不可分损害法律原因的侵权行为，上述每一方与和解侵权行为人都需遵从于由事实调查人分配的比较责任份额。

　　A20 [Not Applicable to This Track.] A路径第20条 无此条可适用于该路径

　　A21 [Not Applicable to This Track.] A路径第21条 无此条可适用于该路径

　　Track B - Several Liability路径B：单独责任

　　B18 Liability of Multiple Tortfeasors for Indivisible Harm

　　If two or more persons, independent tortious conduct is the legal cause of an indivisible injury, each defendant, subject to the exception stated in §12, is severally liable for the comparative share of the plaintiff,s damages assigned to that defendant by the factfinder.

　　B路径第18条 数个侵权行为人对不可分伤害的责任

　　如果两个或两个以上人的独立侵权行为均构成一不可分损害的法律原因，每个人均对事实调查人分配给该人的原告损害赔偿的比较责任份额承担单独责任，适用本重述第12条例外规定的除外。

　　B19 Assignment of Responsibility: Severally Liable Defendants

　　If one or more defendants may be held severally liable for an indivisible injury, and at least one defendant and one other party, settling tortfeasor, or identified person may be found by the factfinder to have engaged in tortious conduct that was a legal cause of the plaintiff,s injury, each such party, settling tortfeasor, and other identified person is submitted to the factfinder for an assignment of a percentage of comparative responsibility.

　　B路径第19条 责任分配：负单独责任的被告

　　如果一名或者多名被告可能对一不可分损害承担单独责任，并且至少一位被告和一位另一方当事人、和解侵权行为人，或者特定人[17]可能被事实调查人确定曾参与了作为受害人损害法律原因侵权行为，上述当事人、和解侵权行为人和特定人都遵从事实调查人对比较责任份额的分配。

　　B20 [Not Applicable to This Track.] B路径第20条 无此条可适用于该路径

　　B21 [Not Applicable to This Track.] B路径第21条 无此条可适用于该路径

　　Track C - Joint and Several Liability with Reallocation路径C：结合再分配的连带责任

　　C18 Liability of Multiple Tortfeasors for Indivisible Harm

　　If the independent tortious conduct of two or more persons is a legal cause of an indivisible injury, each person is jointly and severally liable for the recoverable damages caused by the tortious conduct, subject to the reallocation provision of §C21.

　　C路径第18条 数个侵权行为人对不可分伤害的责任

　　如果两个或两个以上的共同侵权行为构成一不可分损害的法律原因，那么根据本重述C路径第21条规定的再分配条款，每个人均对该侵权行为造成的可获得损害赔偿承担连带责任。

　　C19 Assignment of Responsibility: Jointly and Severally Liable Defendants

　　If one defendant and at least one other party, settling tortfeasor, or employer described in§C20(a) whose comparative responsibility is legally relevant to apportioning liability for the plaintiff,s indivisible injury exist, each party, each settling tortfeasor, and, as permitted by§C20(a), each employer who may be found by the factfinder to have engaged in tortious conduct that was a legal cause of the plaintiff,s injury is submitted to the fact-finder for assignment of a percentage of comparative responsibility.

　　C路径第19条 责任分配：负连带责任的被告

　　如果存在一个被告和至少一个另一方、和解侵权行为人或如本重述C路径第20条(a)所描述的，其比较责任在法律上与原告不可分损害的责任分配有关的雇主，可能被事调查人发现参与了作为原告损害的一个法律原因的请求行为的每一方、每个和解侵权行为人和每个由本重述C路径第20条(a)许可的雇主，均需遵从事实调查人对比较责任份额的分配。

　　C20 Effect of Responsibility Assigned to Immune Employer

　　If a party alleges that the plaintiff,s employer bears some responsibility for the plaintiff,s injury:

　　(a) If the applicable law of the jurisdiction permits a reduction of recoverable damages based on the comparative responsibility of an employer otherwise immune from suit by the plaintiff-employee or permits a contribution claim by a defendant against the employer, the employer may be assigned a percentage of comparative responsibility and: (i) the recoverable damages are reduced as permitted by the applicable law; or (ii) contribution is awarded as permitted by the applicable law and the employer,s comparative responsibility.

　　(b) If the applicable law of the jurisdiction does not permit either a reduction of recoverable damages based on the comparative responsibility of an employer or a contribution claim against the employer, the employer may not be assigned a percentage of comparative responsibility.

　　C路径第20条 分配给免责雇主的责任的效力

　　如果一方宣称原告的雇主对原告的损害负有一定的责任(，那么)：

　　(a)如果该司法辖区适用的法律允许基于雇主的比较责任对可获得损害赔偿的减少，否则免于被作为原告的雇员起诉，或者允许被告对雇主的分摊主张，雇主可能被分配一定份额的比较责任，并且：(i)对可获得损害赔偿的减少为适用的法律所允许;或(ii)分摊的裁定为适用法律和雇主的比较责任所允许。

　　(b)如果该司法辖区适用的法律不允许基于雇主的比较责任减少可获得损害赔偿，或(不允许)对雇主提出分摊主张，则不能向雇主分配比较责任份额。

　　C21 Reallocation of Damages Based on Unenforceability of Judgment

　　(a)Except as provided in Subsection (b), if a defendant establishes that a judgment for contribution cannot be collected fully from another defendant, the court reallocates the uncollectible portion of the damages to all other parties, including the plaintiff, in proportion to the percentages of comparative responsibility assigned to the other parties.

　　(b) Reallocation under Subsection (a) is not available to any defendant subject to joint and several liability pursuant to §12 (intentional tortfeasors) or §15 (persons acting in concert). Any defendant legally liable for the share of comparative fault assigned to another person pursuant to §13 (vicarious liability) or §14 (tortfeasors who fail to protect the plaintiff from the specific risk of an intentional tort) may not obtain reallocation of the liability imposed by those Sections.

　　C路径第21条 基于裁决不可执行的赔偿再分配

　　(a)除非如本条(b)款所规定，如果一个被告确认有关其分摊请求权的判决不可能从另一个被告那里完全受偿，法院将按照包括原告在内的其他各方被分配的比较责任份额，向他们重新分配赔偿金中不能受偿的部分。

　　(b)按照本条(a)款进行的重新分配，不适用于任何依据本重述第十二条(故意侵权行为人)或者第十五条(共同行为人)承担连带责任的被告。任何依据本重述第十三条(替代责任)或者第十四条(因未就某一故意侵权行为的具体风险对原告提供保护而承担责任的侵权行为人)而对分配给他人的比较过错份额承担法律责任的被告，不应接受的基于上述条款[18]的责任的重新分配。

　　Track D - Hybrid Liability Based on Threshold Percentage of Comparative Responsibility

　　路径D：基于比较责任份额界限的混合责任

　　D路径第18条 数个侵权行为人对不可分伤害的责任

　　如果两个或两个以上的共同侵权行为构成一不可分损害的法律原因，每个被分配等于或者超过法律规定界限比例比较责任的被告负连带责任，每个被分配少于法律规定界限比例比较责任的被告负单独责任，适用本重述第十二条(故意侵权行为人)规定的除外。

　　D18 Liability of Multiple Tortfeasors for Indivisible Harm

　　If the independent tortious conduct of two or more persons is a legal cause of an indivisible injury, each defendant who is assigned a percentage of comparative responsibility equal to or in excess of the legal threshold is jointly and severally liable, and each defendant who is assigned a percentage of comparative responsibility below the legal threshold is, subject to the exception in §12(intentional tortfeasors), severally liable.

　　D19 Assignment of Responsibility: Both Jointly and Severally Liable and Severally Liable Defendants

　　(a)If one or more defendants may be held severally liable for an indivisible injury, and at least one defendant and one other party, settling tortfeasor, or identified person may be found by the factfinder to have engaged in tortious conduct that was a legal cause of the plaintiff,s injury, each such party, settling tortfeasor, and other identified person is submitted to the factfinder for an assignment of a percentage of comparative responsibility.

　　(b)If all defendants can only be held jointly and severally liable for an indivisible injury, each party and each settling tortfeasor who may be found by the factfinder to have engaged in tortious conduct that was a legal cause of the plaintiff,s injury are submitted to the fact-finder for an assignment of a percentage of comparative responsibility.

　　D20 [Not Applicable to This Track.]

　　D路径第19条 责任分配：负连带责任的被告与负单独责任的被告

　　(a)如果一名或者多名被告可能对一不可分损害承担单独责任，并且至少一位被告和一位另一方当事人、和解侵权行为人，或者特定人可能被事实调查人确定曾参与了作为受害人损害法律原因侵权行为，上述当事人、和解侵权行为人和特定人都遵从事实调查人对比较责任份额的分配。

　　(b)如果对所有被告均只能对一不可分损害适用连带责任，可能被事实调查人发现参与了作为原告损害的法律原因的侵权行为的每一方和每一和解侵权行为人都需遵从事实调查人对比较责任份额的分配。

　　D21 [Not Applicable to This Track.]D路径第21条 无此条可适用于该路径

　　Track E - Hybrid Liability Based on Type of Damages 4 路径E：基于赔偿种类的混合责任

　　E18 Liability of Multiple Tortfeasors for Indivisible Harm

　　If the independent tortious conduct of two or more persons is a legal cause of an indivisible injury, each defendant is jointly and severally liable for the economic-damages portion of the recoverable damages and, subject to the exceptions stated in §12 (intentional tortfeasors) and §15(persons acting in concert), is severally liable for that defendant,s comparative share of the noneconomic damages.

　　E路径第18条 数个侵权行为人对不可分伤害的责任

　　如果一个或多个人的独立侵权行为构成一不可分伤害的法律原因，每个被告均对可获得损害赔偿中的经济损害部分承担连带责任，依据本重述第十二条(故意侵权行为人)和第十五条(共同行为人)的除外;对该被告的非经济损害部分的比较份额承担单独责任。

　　E19 Assignment of Responsibility: Joint and Several Liability for Economic Damages and Several Liability for Noneconomic Damages

　　(a)When plaintiff may recover only economic damages for an indivisible injury and at least one defendant and one other party or settling tortfeasor may be found by the factfinder to have engaged in tortious conduct that was a legal cause of the plaintiff,s injury, each such party and settling tortfeasor is submitted to the factfinder for assignment of a percentage of comparative responsibility.

　　(b) When plaintiff may recover noneconomic damages and at least one defendant and one other party, settling tortfeasor, or identified person may be found by the factfinder to have engaged in tortious conduct that was a legal cause of the plaintiff,s injury, each such party, settling tortfeasor, and identified person is submitted to the factfinder for assignment of a percentage of comparative responsibility.

　　E路径第19条 责任分配：对经济损害的连带责任以及对非经济赔偿的单独责任

　　(a)当原告仅可能获得一不可分损害的经济损失赔偿，并且至少一位被告和一位另一方当事人或和解侵权行为人可能被事实调查人发现曾参与了一项构成原告损害法律原因的侵权行为，上述各方和和解侵权行为人需遵从事实调查人对比较责任份额的分配。

　　(b)当原告可能获得非经济损害赔偿，并且至少一位被告和一位另一方当事人、和解侵权行为人，或者特定人，可能被事实调查人发现曾参与了一项构成原告损害法律原因的侵权行为，上述各方、和解侵权行为人和该特定人需遵从事实调查人对比较责任份额的分配。

　　E20 [Not Applicable to This Track.] E路径第20条 无此条可适用于该路径

　　E21 [Not Applicable to This Track.] E路径第21条 无此条可适用于该路径

　　Topic 3- Contribution and Indemnity第三题：分担与补偿[19]

　　22 Indemnity第二十二条 补偿

　　(a)When two or more persons are or may be liable for the same harm and one of them discharges the liability of another in whole or in part by settlement or discharge of judgment, the person discharging the liability is entitled to recover indemnity in the amount paid to the plaintiff, plus reasonable legal expenses, if:

　　(1)the indemnitor has agreed by contract to indemnify the indemnitee, or

　　(2) the indemnitee

　　(i)was not liable except vicariously for the tort of the indemnitor, or

　　(ii)was not liable except as a seller of a product supplied to the indemnitee by the indemnitor and the indemnitee was not independently culpable.

　　(b) A person who is otherwise entitled to recover indemnity pursuant to contract may do so even if the party against whom indemnity is sought would not be liable to the plaintiff.

　　(a)当两个或两个以上的人对同一伤害承担或可能承担责任时，其中一人通过和解或履行判决免除他人的全部或部分责任时，免除责任的一方有权(从该他人处)获得支付给原告数额的补偿，在以下情况还包括合理的法律费用支出：

　　(1)补偿人事先通过签订合同同意补偿受补偿人，或

　　(2)受补偿人

　　(i)除非因替代责任[20]，否则不对补偿人的侵权行为负责，或

　　(ii)除非补偿人是为受补偿人提供产品的卖方，且受补偿人并非单独具有可责难性，否则不负责任。

　　(b)有权依照合同获得补偿的人，即使在寻求补偿的人的对方当事人并不对原告负责的情况下，仍然可以行使补偿请求权。

　　23 Contribution第二十三条 分担

　　(a)When two or more persons are or may be liable for the same harm and one of them discharges the liability of another by settlement or discharge of judgment, the person discharging the liability is entitled to recover contribution from the other, unless the other previously had a valid settlement and release from the plaintiff.

　　(b) A person entitled to recover contribution may recover no more than the amount paid to the plaintiff in excess of the person,s comparative share of responsibility.

　　(c) A person who has a right of indemnity against another person under §22 does not have a right of contribution against that person and is not subject to liability for contribution to that person.

　　(a)当两人或多人对或可能对同一伤害承担责任而其中一人已通过和解或履行裁决承担他人责任时，承担他人责任的该人有权向该他人追偿责任分担，除非该他人此前已与原告达成有效的和解、得到原告的免除。

　　(b)有权追偿责任分担的人可以获得不多于该人支付给原告的数额中超出该人比较责任份额的部分。

　　(c)依据第22节享有免责权的一方对免责方不享有分摊权，并且不对该免责方负有分摊责任。

　　Topic 4- Settlement第四题：和解

　　24 Definition and Effect of Settlement

　　(a) A settlement is a legally enforceable agreement in which a claimant agrees not to seek recovery outside the agreement for specified injuries or claims from some or all of the persons who might be liable for those injuries or claims.

　　(b) Persons released from liability by the terms of a settlement are relieved of further liability to the claimant for the injuries or claims covered by the agreement, but the agreement does not discharge any other person from liability.

　　第二十四条 和解的定义与效力

　　(a)和解是一份具有法律强制性的协议，在该协议中请求权人同意在协议之外，不再针对该特别损害寻求额外赔偿，或者向部分或所有可能对相关损害或主张负责的人提出主张。

　　(b)通过和解方式免除责任的人，在和解协议所涵盖的特别损害或者主张的范围内，可能产生的对请求权人的未来责任也得到了免除，但该和解协议并不免除任何其他人的责任。

　　25 Satisfaction of Claim Through Discharge of Judgment

　　第二十五条 通过履行判决满足诉讼请求

　　(a)When a judgment includes a determination of the entirety of recoverable damages suffered by the plaintiff for an indivisible injury and provides for their recovery by the plaintiff against one or more of the defendants, payment of the full amount of recoverable damages constitutes a satisfaction of the plaintiff,s rights against all tortfeasors legally responsible for the plaintiff,s indivisible injury.

　　(b)When a judgment includes a determination of the entirety of recoverable damages suffered by the plaintiff for an indivisible injury and provides for their recovery by the plaintiff against multiple defendants, payment by one or more judgment defendants of less than the full amount of the recoverable damages constitutes a reduction of the plaintiff,s right to recover from the judgment defendants in the amount of the value of the payment.

　　(c) When a judgment against one or more tortfeasors, none of whom is jointly and severally liable, is for an amount that is or may be less than all of the recoverable damages by the plaintiff, payment of the amount of the judgment does not constitute a satisfaction of the plaintiff,s rights against all tortfeasors.

　　(a)当一项判决包括了对原告因遭受的一项不可分损害而可获得损害赔偿的损害范围的确定，并提供原告可从被告中的一个或多个处获得赔偿时，对原告可获得损害赔偿的全额支付，构成了对原告享有的对所有对原告所受该不可分损害负有法律责任的侵权行为人的请求权的满足。

　　(b)当一项判决包括了对原告因遭受的一项不可分损害而可获得损害赔偿的损害范围的确定，并提供原告可从多个共同被告处获得赔偿时，该案被告中的一个或者多个支付的少于原告可获得损害赔偿总额的赔偿等额减少原告可从该案被告获得的赔偿额。

　　(c)当一项确认了少于或者可能少于原告可获得损害赔偿数额的判决，是针对一个或者多个侵权行为人，而他们中没有任何人承担连带责任时，对判决确定的该赔偿额的支付并不构成对原告针对所有侵权行为人权利的满足。

　　Topic 5- Apportionment of Liability when Damages can be Divided by Causation

　　第五题：损害可依因果关系分割时的责任分担

　　26 Apportionment of Liability When Damages Can Be Divided by Causation

　　(a) When damages for an injury can be divided by causation, the factfinder first divides them into their indivisible component parts and separately apportions liability for each indivisible component part under Topics 1 through 4.

　　(b) Damages can be divided by causation when the evidence provides a reasonable basis for the factfinder to determine:

　　(1) that any legally culpable conduct of a party or other relevant person to whom the fact-finder assigns a percentage of responsibility was a legal cause of less than the entire damages for which the plaintiff seeks recovery and

　　(2) the amount of damages separately caused by that conduct.

　　Otherwise, the damages are indivisible and thus the injury is indivisible. Liability for an indivisible injury is apportioned under Topics 1 through 4.

　　第二十六条 损害可依因果关系分割时的责任分担

　　(a)当对某一损害的赔偿可依因果关系被分割时，事实调查人首先将其分割为其不可再分的组成部分，然后依据上述第一至四题的规定，就每一不可再分的组成部分单独分配责任。

　　(b)当有关证据提供了可使事实调查人确定以下事项的合理依据时，赔偿可依因果关系被分割;

　　(1)被事实调查人向其分配责任份额的一方当事人或其他相关人，其任何具有法律上可责难性的行为，构成少于原告所寻求获得的全部赔偿额[21]的一项法律原因，并且;

　　(2)此赔偿数额为该行为单独造成。

　　否则，赔偿便不可分割，因此有关损害也不可分割。对一不可分损害的责任应依据第一至四题进行分配。

　　Part Three: Products Liability 产品责任

　　Restatement of the Law, Third, Torts: Products Liability

　　Copyright © 1998 by The American Law Institute

　　《侵权法重述第三版：产品责任》

　　Chapter 1- Liability of Commercial Product Sellers Based on Product Defects at Time of Sale

　　第一章基于销售时产品缺陷的商业产品销售者责任

　　Topic 1- Liability Rules Applicable to Products Generally主题1普遍适用于产品的责任规则

　　1 Liability of Commercial Seller or Distributor for Harm Caused by Defective Products

　　商业销售者或者分发者因缺陷产品导致损害的责任

　　One engaged in the business of selling or otherwise distributing products who sells or distributes a defective product is subject to liability for harm to persons or property caused by the defect.

　　从事产品销售或者以其他方式分发[1]的经营者，销售或者分发缺陷产品，应对该缺陷所造成的人身或者财产损害承担责任。

　　2 Categories of Product Defect.产品缺陷的种类

　　A product is defective when, at the time of sale or distribution, it contains a manufacturing defect, is defective in design, or is defective because of inadequate instructions or warnings. A product:

　　(a) contains a manufacturing defect when the product departs from its intended design even though all possible care was exercised in the preparation and marketing of the product;

　　(b) is defective in design when the foreseeable risks of harm posed by the product could have been reduced or avoided by the adoption of a reasonable alternative design by the seller or other distributor, or a predecessor in the commercial chain of distribution, and the omission of the alternative design renders the product not reasonably safe;

　　(c) is defective because of inadequate instructions or warnings when the foreseeable risks of harm posed by the product could have been reduced or avoided by the provision of reasonable instructions or warnings by the seller or other distributor, or a predecessor in the commercial chain of distribution, and the omission of the instructions or warnings renders the product not reasonably safe.

　　产品在销售或者分发时，包含制造缺陷，设计存在缺陷，或者因为说明或警示不充分而存在缺陷，则该产品存在缺陷。产品：

　　(a)如果背离其设计意图，即便在该产品准备和营销过程中已尽到所有可能的注意，那么(产品)包含制造缺陷;

　　(b)如果可预见的因该产品引起的损害风险能够通过销售者或以其他方式分发者，或者他们在分销商业链中的前手，通过采纳合理替代性设计而减少或者避免，而没有采纳合理替代性设计致使产品不具有合理性安全，那么(产品)设计存在缺陷;

　　(c)如果可预见的因该产品引起的损害风险能够通过销售者或以其他方式分发者，或者他们在分销商业链中的前手，通过提供合理的说明或警示而减少或者避免，而没有提供合理的说明或警示致使产品不具有合理性安全，那么(产品)因说明或警示不足而存在缺陷。

　　3 Circumstantial Evidence Supporting Inference of Product Defect

　　支持推断产品缺陷的间接证据

　　It may be inferred that the harm sustained by the plaintiff was caused by a product defect existing at the time of sale or distribution, without proof of a specific defect, when the incident that harmed the plaintiff:

　　(a) was of a kind that ordinarily occurs as a result of product defect; and

　　(b) was not, in the particular case, solely the result of causes other than product defect existing at the time of sale or distribution.

　　当损害原告的事件满足下列特征，即使没有关于具体缺陷的证据，也可以推定原告所遭受的损害是由在产品在销售或者分发时存在的产品缺陷导致的：

　　(a)该事件属于通常是由产品缺陷引起的类型;并且

　　(b)在该具体案件中，不是仅仅由于产品在销售或者分发时存在的缺陷以外的原因引起的。

　　4 Noncompliance and Compliance with Product Safety Statutes or Regulations

　　对产品安全法律或法规的违反与遵守

　　In connection with liability for defective design or inadequate instructions or warnings:

　　(a) a product,s noncompliance with an applicable product safety statute or administrative regulation renders the product defective with respect to the risks sought to be reduced by the statute or regulation; and

　　(b) a product,s compliance with an applicable product safety statute or administrative regulation is properly considered in determining whether the product is defective with respect to the risks sought to be reduced by the statute or regulation, but such compliance does not preclude as a matter of law a finding of product defect.

　　有关设计缺陷责任或者说明或警示不充分责任：

　　(a)产品对可适用的产品安全法律或法规的违反，致使产品存在与该法律或法规旨在减小的风险有关的缺陷;并且

　　(b)产品对可适用的产品安全法律或法规的遵守，在决定该产品是否存在与该法律或法规旨在减小的风险有关的缺陷时应该予以适当考虑，但这种遵守并不排除作为法律问题对产品缺陷的认定。

　　Topic 2- Liability Rules Applicable to Special Products or Product Markets

　　主题2适用于特殊产品或产品市场的责任规则

　　5 Liability of Commercial Seller or Distributor of Product Components for Harm Caused by Products Into Which Components Are Integrated

　　One engaged in the business of selling or otherwise distributing product components who sells or distributes a component is subject to liability for harm to persons or property caused by a product into which the component is integrated if:

　　(a) the component is defective in itself, as defined in this Chapter, and the defect causes the harm; or

　　(b)(1) the seller or distributor of the component substantially participates in the integration of the component into the design of the product; and

　　(2) the integration of the component causes the product to be defective, as defined in this Chapter; and

　　(3) the defect in the product causes the harm.

　　§5.产品零件商业销售者或分销者对装配了该零件的产品导致损害的责任

　　从事产品零件销售或者以其他方式分发的经营者，销售或分销产品零件，应对对装配了该零件的产品导致的人身或财产损害承担责任，如果：

　　(a)该零件自身存在本章所定义的缺陷，并且该缺陷导致了该损害;或

　　(b)(1)该零件的销售者或分销者实质上参与了将该零件装配入该产品设计;并且

　　(2)该零件的装配导致该产品存在本章所定义的缺陷;并且

　　(3)产品的该项缺陷造成了该损害。

　　6 Liability of Commercial Seller or Distributor for Harm Caused by Defective Prescription Drugs and Medical Devices

　　(a) A manufacturer of a prescription drug or medical device who sells or otherwise distributes a defective drug or medical device is subject to liability for harm to persons caused by the defect. A prescription drug or medical device is one that may be legally sold or otherwise distributed only pursuant to a health-care provider,s prescription.

　　(b) For purposes of liability under Subsection (a), a prescription drug or medical device is defective if at the time of sale or other distribution the drug or medical device:

　　(1) contains a manufacturing defect as defined in 2(a); or

　　(2) is not reasonably safe due to defective design as defined in Subsection (c); or

　　(3) is not reasonably safe due to inadequate instructions or warnings as defined in Subsection (d).

　　(c) A prescription drug or medical device is not reasonably safe due to defective design if the foreseeable risks of harm posed by the drug or medical device are sufficiently great in relation to its foreseeable therapeutic benefits that reasonable health-care providers, knowing of such foreseeable risks and therapeutic benefits, would not prescribe the drug or medical device for any class of patients.

　　(d) A prescription drug or medical device is not reasonably safe due to inadequate instructions or warnings if reasonable instructions or warnings regarding foreseeable risks of harm are not provided to:

　　(1) prescribing and other health-care providers who are in a position to reduce the risks of harm in accordance with the instructions or warnings; or

　　(2) the patient when the manufacturer knows or has reason to know that health-care providers will not be in a position to reduce the risks of harm in accordance with the instructions or warnings.

　　(e) A retail seller or other distributor of a prescription drug or medical device is subject to liability for harm caused by the drug or device if:

　　(1) at the time of sale or other distribution the drug or medical device contains a manufacturing defect as defined in 2(a); or

　　(2) at or before the time of sale or other distribution of the drug or medical device the retail seller or other distributor fails to exercise reasonable care and such failure causes harm to persons.

　　§6.商业销售者或分销者对缺陷处方药和医疗设备导致损害的责任

　　(a)处方药或医疗设备的制造商销售或者以其他方式分发有缺陷的处方药或医疗设备，应对该缺陷对人身造成的伤害承担责任。处方药或医疗设备是指必须依据卫生保健提供者的处方才能合法地销售或者以其他方式分发的药品或设备。[2]

　　(b)为第a款规定的责任目的，如果在销售或以其他方式分销时处方药或医疗设备符合下列情形之一的，存在缺陷：

　　(1)包含第2条第a款所定义的制造缺陷;或

　　(2)由于本条第c款所定义的设计缺陷而不具有合理的安全性;或

　　(3)由于本条第d款所定义的说明或警示不充分而不具有合理的安全性。

　　(c)如果某种药品或医疗设备引起的可预见的损害风险与其可预见的治疗效果相比十分巨大[3]，以致理性的卫生保健提供者在知道可预见的风险和治疗效果的情况下，都不会给任何一类患者开具该药品或医疗设备的处方，那么该处方药或医疗设备由于设计缺陷而不具有合理的安全性

　　(d)如果关于可预见的损害风险的合理说明或者警示未能提供给以下对象，那么处方药或医疗设备由于说明或警示不充分而不具有合理的安全性：

　　(1)处于依据说明或警示降低损害风险环节[4]的开具处方或者其他卫生保健提供者;或

　　(2)在处方药或医疗设备制造者知道或有理由知道的卫生保健提供者不会处于依据说明或警示降低损害风险环节情况下的病人。

　　(e)处方药或医疗设备的零售商或其他分发者应对该药品或设备所致的损害承担责任，如果：

　　1)该药品或医疗设备在销售或以其他方式分销时包含第2款第a款所定义的制造缺陷;或

　　(2)该药品或医疗设备在销售或以其他方式分销时或在此之前，零售商或其他分发者未尽合理注意，并因此导致了人身伤害。

　　7 Liability of Commercial Seller or Distributor for Harm Caused by Defective Food Products

　　One engaged in the business of selling or otherwise distributing food products who sells or distributes a food product that is defective under §2, §3, or §4 is subject to liability for harm to persons or property caused by the defect. Under §2(a), a harm-causing ingredient of the food product constitutes a defect if a reasonable consumer would not expect the food product to contain that ingredient.

　　§7.商业销售者或分销者对缺陷食品导致损害的责任

　　从事食品销售或者分销经营活动者，销售或者以其他方式分发存在第2、3、4规定的缺陷的食品，应对该缺陷所造成的人身或财产损害承担责任。根据第2条第a款的规定，如果一个合理的消费者不能预见该食品中含有此种成分，则食品中的该致害成分构成缺陷。

　　8 Liability of Commercial Seller or Distributor of Defective Used Products

　　One engaged in the business of selling or otherwise distributing used products who sells or distributes a defective used product is subject to liability for harm to persons or property caused by the defect if the defect:

　　(a) arises from the seller,s failure to exercise reasonable care; or

　　(b) is a manufacturing defect under §2(a) or a defect that may be inferred under §3 and the seller,s marketing of the product would cause a reasonable person in the position of the buyer to expect the used product to present no greater risk of defect than if the product were new; or

　　(c) is a defect under §2 or §3 in a used product remanufactured by the seller or a predecessor in the commercial chain of distribution of the used product; or

　　(d) arises from a used product,s noncompliance under §4 with a product safety statute or regulation applicable to the used product.

　　A used product is a product that, prior to the time of sale or other distribution referred to in this Section, is commercially sold or otherwise distributed to a buyer not in the commercial chain of distribution and used for some period of time.

　　§8.商业销售者或分销者对存在缺陷的旧货导致损害的责任

　　从事旧货销售或者以其他方式分发的经营者，销售或分发有缺陷的旧货，应对该缺陷所造成的人身或财产损害承担责任，如果该缺陷：

　　(a)源于销售者未尽合理注意;或

　　(b)是第2条第a款所规定的制造缺陷，或第3条规定的可以推断出的缺陷，并且销售者的产品营销会使处于与购买者相同环节的理性人期望该旧货不会比该产品全新时具有更大的风险;或者

　　(c)是第2条和第3条规定的经过销售者或商业分发链条中的前手重制[5]的旧货;或者

　　(d)源于根据第4条的规定，旧货违反了适用于旧货的产品安全法律或法规。

　　旧货是指在本条中提到的销售或者以其他方式分发之前，被商业性地出售或者以其他方式分发给商业分发链条以外的购买者并被使用了一段时间的产品。

　　Chapter 2- Liability of Commercial Product Sellers Not Based on Product Defects at Time of Sale

　　第二章非基于销售时产品缺陷的商业产品销售者责任

　　9 Liability of Commercial Product Seller or Distributor for Harm Caused by Misrepresentation

　　One engaged in the business of selling or otherwise distributing products who, in connection with the sale of a product, makes a fraudulent, negligent, or innocent misrepresentation of material fact concerning the product is subject to liability for harm to persons or property caused by the misrepresentation.

　　§9.商业产品销售者或分销者因错误陈述导致损害的责任

　　从事产品销售或者以其他方式分发的经营者，对与产品有关的重要事实作出与产品销售有关的欺诈性的、有过失的或者无知的错误陈述，应对错误陈述导致的人身或财产损害承担责任。

　　10 Liability of Commercial Product Seller or Distributor for Harm Caused by Post-Sale Failure to Warn

　　(a) One engaged in the business of selling or otherwise distributing products is subject to liability for harm to persons or property caused by the seller,s failure to provide a warning after the time of sale or distribution of a product if a reasonable person in the seller,s position would provide such a warning.

　　(b) A reasonable person in the seller,s position would provide a warning after the time of sale if:

　　(1) the seller knows or reasonably should know that the product poses a substantial risk of harm to persons or property; and

　　(2) those to whom a warning might be provided can be identified and can reasonably be assumed to be unaware of the risk of harm; and

　　(3) a warning can be effectively communicated to and acted on by those to whom a warning might be provided; and

　　(4) the risk of harm is sufficiently great to justify the burden of providing a warning.

　　§10.商业产品销售者或分销者因售后未能警示导致损害的责任

　　(a)因销售者未能在产品销售或者以其他方式分发后提出警示而导致人身或财产损害，如果一个处于销售者环节的理性人应该会提出这样的警示，从事产品销售或者以其他方式分发的经营者应该承担责任。

　　(b)一个处于销售者环节的理性人，应该会在销售之后提出警示，如果：

　　(1)销售者知道或者理应知道产品引起了实质性的人身或财产损害风险;而且

　　(2)那些应该被提供警示的人能够被确定，并且可以合理的被假设并不知道该损害风险;而且

　　(3)警示能够被有效地传达给那些应该被提供警示并根据警示采取行动的人;并且

　　(4)损害风险十分巨大，使得承担提供警示的负担有充足的理由。

　　11 Liability of Commercial Product Seller or Distributor for Harm Caused by Post-Sale Failure to Recall Product

　　One engaged in the business of selling or otherwise distributing products is subject to liability for harm to persons or property caused by the seller,s failure to recall a product after the time of sale or distribution if:

　　(a)(1) a governmental directive issued pursuant to a statute or administrative regulation specifically requires the seller or distributor to recall the product; or

　　(2) the seller or distributor, in the absence of a recall requirement under Subsection (a)(1), undertakes to recall the product; and

　　(b) the seller or distributor fails to act as a reasonable person in recalling the product.

　　§11.商业产品销售者或分销者因售后未能召回产品导致损害的责任

　　满足下列条件时，从事产品销售或者以其他方式分发的经营者，应对销售者未能在销售或分销后召回该产品从而导致的人身或财产损害承担责任：

　　(a)(1)依据法律或法规颁发的政府命令，明确要求销售者或分销者召回该产品。或

　　2)在没有根据第a款第1项召回要求的情况下，销售者或分销者承诺召回该产品;而且

　　(b)销售者或分销者未能在召回产品过程中作为理性人行事。

　　12 Liability of Successor for Harm Caused by Defective Products Sold Commercially by Predecessor

　　A successor corporation or other business entity that acquires assets of a predecessor corporation or other business entity is subject to liability for harm to persons or property caused by a defective product sold or otherwise distributed commercially by the predecessor if the acquisition:

　　(a) is accompanied by an agreement for the successor to assume such liability; or

　　(b) results from a fraudulent conveyance to escape liability for the debts or liabilities of the predecessor; or

　　(c) constitutes a consolidation or merger with the predecessor; or

　　(d) results in the successor becoming a continuation of the predecessor.

　　§12.后手对前手商业性销售的缺陷产品导致损害的责任

　　取得前手公司或其他经济实体资产的后手公司或其他经济实体应对经该前手商业性销售或以其他方式分发的缺陷产品所造成的人身或财产损害承担责任，如果此种取得：

　　(a)附有后手承担相关责任的协议;或者

　　(b)是为逃避债务责任或前手责任而欺诈性财产转移的结果;

　　(c)构成与前手的联营或合并;或者

　　(d)导致后手成为前手的延续。

　　Chapter 3- Liability of Successors and Apparent Manufacturers

　　第三章后手和非真正制造者责任

　　13 Liability of Successor for Harm Caused by Successor’s Own Post-Sale Failure to Warn

　　(a) A successor corporation or other business entity that acquires assets of a predecessor corporation or other business entity, whether or not liable under the rule stated in §12, is subject to liability for harm to persons or property caused by the successor,s failure to warn of a risk created by a product sold or distributed by the predecessor if:

　　(1) the successor undertakes or agrees to provide services for maintenance or repair of the product or enters into a similar relationship with purchasers of the predecessor,s products giving rise to actual or potential economic advantage to the successor, and

　　(2) a reasonable person in the position of the successor would provide a warning.

　　(b) A reasonable person in the position of the successor would provide a warning if:

　　(1) the successor knows or reasonably should know that the product poses a substantial risk of harm to persons or property; and

　　(2) those to whom a warning might be provided can be identified and can reasonably be assumed to be unaware of the risk of harm; and

　　(3) a warning can be effectively communicated to and acted on by those to whom a warning might be provided; and

　　(4) the risk of harm is sufficiently great to justify the burden of providing a warning.

　　§13.后手对后手自己售后未能警示导致损害的责任

　　(a)取得前手公司或其他经济实体资产的后手公司或其他经济实体，无论根据第12条的规定是否应当负责，因对其未能就前手已销售或分发的产品所产生的风险警示用户而造成的人身或财产损害承担责任，如果：

　　(1)该后手承诺或同意为该产品提供维护或修理服务，或者与前手产品的购买者形成类似的关系而获得实际或潜在经济利益，并且

　　(2)一个处于该后手环节的理性人将提出警示。

　　(b)一个处于该后手环节的理性人将提出警示，如果：

　　(1)该后手知道或者理应知道产品引起了实质性的人身或财产损害风险;并且

　　(2)那些应该被提供警示的人能够被确定，并且可以合理的被假设并不知道该损害风险;而且

　　(3)警示能够被有效地传达给那些应该被提供警示并根据警示采取行动的人;并且

　　(4)损害风险十分巨大，使得承担提供警示的负担有充足的理由。

　　14 Selling or Distributing as One’s Own a Product Manufactured by Another

　　One engaged in the business of selling or otherwise distributing products who sells or distributes as its own a product manufactured by another is subject to the same liability as though the seller or distributor were the product,s manufacturer.

　　§14.将他人制造的产品作为自己产品的销售或分销

　　从事产品销售或者以其他方式分发的经营者，将他人制造的产品作为自己产品的销售或分销，应该承担与如果该销售者或者分销者就是该产品制造者相同的责任。

　　Chapter 4- Provisions of General Applicability 第四章具有普遍适用性的条款

　　Topic 1- Causation 主题1因果关系

　　15 General Rule Governing Causal Connection Between Product Defect and Harm

　　Whether a product defect caused harm to persons or property is determined by the prevailing rules and principles governing causation in tort.

　　§15.支配产品缺陷与损害之间因果联系的通则

　　产品缺陷是否导致人身或财产损害根据侵权法上支配因果关系的通行规则和原则来确定。

　　16 Increased Harm Due to Product Defect

　　(a) When a product is defective at the time of commercial sale or other distribution and the defect is a substantial factor in increasing the plaintiff,s harm beyond that which would have resulted from other causes, the product seller is subject to liability for the increased harm.

　　(b) If proof supports a determination of the harm that would have resulted from other causes in the absence of the product defect, the product seller,s liability is limited to the increased harm attributable solely to the product defect.

　　(c) If proof does not support a determination under Subsection (b) of the harm that would have resulted in the absence of the product defect, the product seller is liable for all of the plaintiff,s harm attributable to the defect and other causes.

　　(d) A seller of a defective product that is held liable for part of the harm suffered by the plaintiff under Subsection (b), or all of the harm suffered by the plaintiff under Subsection (c), is jointly and severally liable or severally liable with other parties who bear legal responsibility for causing the harm, determined by applicable rules of joint and several liability.

　　§16.产品缺陷导致的损害扩大

　　(a)当产品在商业销售或以其他方式分发时存在缺陷，而且该缺陷使得原告的损害扩大到因其他原因造成的损害之外，该产品销售者应对扩大的损害承担责任。

　　(b)如果有证据支持确定没有产品缺陷情形下其他原因会造成的损害，那么该产品销售者的责任就仅限于可归责于产品缺陷的损害扩大部分。

　　(c)如果没有证据支持确定第b款规定的没有产品缺陷情形下其他原因会造成的损害，那么该产品销售者应对可归责于该缺陷及其他原因的全部原告损害负责。

　　(d)被判决[7]根据第b款对原告遭受的部分损害或根据第c款对原告的全部损害负责的缺陷产品销售者，与其他对造成损害应负法律责任的当事人，由可适用的连带责任规则确定承担连带责任或按份责任.

　　Topic 2- Affirmative Defenses 主题2积极抗辩

　　17 Apportionment of Responsibility Between or Among Plaintiff, Sellers and Distributors of Defective Products, and Others

　　(a) A plaintiff,s recovery of damages for harm caused by a product defect may be reduced if the conduct of the plaintiff combines with the product defect to cause the harm and the plaintiff,s conduct fails to conform to generally applicable rules establishing appropriate standards of care.

　　(b) The manner and extent of the reduction under Subsection (a) and the apportionment of plaintiff,s recovery among multiple defendants are governed by generally applicable rules apportioning responsibility.

　　§17.原告、缺陷产品的销售者或分销者以及其他人之间的责任分担

　　(a)如果原告的行为与产品缺陷相结合导致了损害，且原告的行为不符合确定适当注意标准的普遍适用规则，则原告因缺陷产品导致损害而可获得的赔偿金可以被减少。

　　(b)根据第a款减少的方式与范围，以及在多名被告之间对原告可获得的救济进行分担，应当由责任分担的普遍适用规则支配。

　　18 Disclaimers, Limitations, Waivers, and Other Contractual Exculpations as Defenses to Products Liability Claims for Harm to Persons

　　Disclaimers and limitations of remedies by product sellers or other distributors, waivers by product purchasers, and other similar contractual exculpations, oral or written, do not bar or reduce otherwise[8] valid products liability claims against sellers or other distributors of new products for harm to persons.

　　§18.免责声明，责任限制，弃权及其他约定免责作为对人身损害产品责任请求的抗辩

　　产品的销售者或其他分销者所作的免责声明和赔偿限制，产品的购买者的弃权，以及其他类似的约定免责，无论口头或书面，都不阻碍或减少因人身损害而对全新产品的销售者或其他分销者另行提起的有效产品责任请求。

　　Topic 3- Definitions主题3定义

　　19 Definition of "Product"产品的定义

　　For purposes of this Restatement:

　　(a) A product is tangible personal property distributed commercially for use or consumption. Other items, such as real property and electricity, are products when the context of their distribution and use is sufficiently analogous to the distribution and use of tangible personal property that it is appropriate to apply the rules stated in this Restatement.

　　(b) Services, even when provided commercially, are not products.

　　(c) Human blood and human tissue, even when provided commercially, are not subject to the rules of this Restatement.

　　为本重述的目的：

　　(a)产品是经过商业性销售以供使用或消费的有形动产。其他种类如不动产和电，当它们的销售及使用情形与有形动产的销售及使用足够类似而适用本重述所述规则显得适当时，也是产品。

　　(b)服务，即使是商业性提供的，也不是产品。

　　(c)人类血液及人类组织器官，即使是商业性提供的，也不受本重述规则的支配。

　　20 Definition of "One Who Sells or Otherwise Distributes"

　　销售或以其他方式分发者的定义

　　For purposes of this Restatement: 为本重述的目的：

　　(a) One sells a product when, in a commercial context, one transfers ownership thereto either for use or consumption or for resale leading to ultimate use or consumption. Commercial product sellers include, but are not limited to, manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers.

　　(b) One otherwise distributes a product when, in a commercial transaction other than a sale, one provides the product to another either for use or consumption or as a preliminary step leading to ultimate use or consumption. Commercial nonsale product distributors include, but are not limited to, lessors, bailors, and those who provide products to others as a means of promoting either the use or consumption of such products or some other commercial activity.

　　(c) One also sells or otherwise distributes a product when, in a commercial transaction, one provides a combination of products and services and either the transaction taken as a whole, or the product component thereof, satisfies the criteria in Subsection (a) or (b).

　　(a)在商业情形下向他人转让所有权，或是为了使用或消费，或是为了指向最终使用或消费的转售，该行为人是在销售产品。商业产品销售者包括但不限于制造商、批发商及零售商。

　　(b)在非销售性商业交易中，不是为了使用或者消费，也不是作为导向最终使用或消费的预备步骤，向他人提供产品，该行为人是在以其他方式分发产品。商业性非销售产品分发者包括但不限于出租人、寄托人及将其作为促进此类产品的使用、消费或者其他商业活动的一种方式而提供产品者。

　　(c)如果在商业交易中提供产品和服务的结合体，或是该交易作为一个整体，或是其中的产品，符合第a款或第b款规定的标准，该行为人也是在销售或以其他方式分发产品。

　　21 Definition of "Harm to Persons or Property": Recovery for Economic Loss

　　For purposes of this Restatement, harm to persons or property includes economic loss if caused by harm to:

　　(a) the plaintiff,s person; or

　　(b) the person of another when harm to the other interferes with an interest of the plaintiff protected by tort law; or

　　(c) the plaintiff,s property other than the defective product itself.

　　§21.人身或财产损害的定义：可获得的对经济损失的救济

　　为本重述的目的，人身或财产损害包括以如下列举为对象的损害所导致的经济损失：

　　(a)原告的人身;或

　　(b)其他的人身，当对他人的损害妨碍了原告受侵权法保护的利益时;或

　　(c)除了缺陷产品本身之外的原告财产。