The Structural Logic and Criminal Application of the Theory of Supervisory Negligence
Hangzhou Normal University
Abstract
Supervisory negligence is a form of negligent crime that occurs when individuals with supervisory or managerial duties fail to fulfill their responsibilities during production and operational activities, resulting in harmful consequences. The theoretical foundation for criminal liability in such cases lies in the theory of supervisory negligence. This article begins by clarifying the definition of supervisory negligence, comparing its broad and narrow interpretations, and arguing against the necessity of distinguishing it from managerial negligence. It then analyzes three major theoretical models of negligence—traditional, “new,” and “neo-new” negligence theories—and advocates adopting the “duty to avoid results” from the new negligence theory as the foundational principle of supervisory negligence. Based on this theoretical stance, the article elaborates on the constitutive elements of supervisory negligence: (1) the supervisor must have a duty of care regarding the harmful result, comprising both the duty to foresee and the duty to avoid the result; (2) there must be a breach of this duty through a positive act or omission; and (3) there must be a causal link between the supervisory failure and the harmful outcome, assessed through formal conformity, material conformity, and interruption of causality. The article concludes by offering two recommendations to improve the recognition and handling of supervisory negligence crimes.
Keywords:
supervisory negligence; new theory of negligence; causation; trust principleCopyright Notice & License:
All articles published in Journal of Law, Psychology, and Communication Studies are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
This license permits:
-
Unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium;
-
Commercial and non-commercial use;
-
Adaptation and transformation, including derivative works;
provided that appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source, and a link to the license is included.
Authors retain full copyright of their work and grant the journal the right of first publication.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
PDF Downloads
Journal Info
How to Cite
References
国家统计局. (2024). 2023年国民经济和社会发展统计公报. https://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/ndsj/2023/indexch.htm
胡鹰. (1995). 过失犯罪研究. 中国政法大学出版社.
骆群. (2014). 监督过失责任及其在食品监管渎职犯罪中的运用. 法治与社会发展, (2).
前田雅英. (2017). 刑法总论讲义 (曾文科译). 北京大学出版社. (原著出版年份未列出，若知请补充)
闻志强. (2021). 过失犯实行行为的刑法争议与规范判断. 法治社会, (5).
刘丁炳. (2008). 监督管理过失理论研究. 求索, (2).
杨智博. (2021). 过失真正不作为犯的认定规则和限制路径. 刑法论丛, 第2卷.
刘彦辉, & 马浩予. (2021). 新过失论之提倡——兼论后疫情时代妨害传染病防治罪的主观责任. 北方法学, (6).
程皓. (2009). 注意义务比较研究——以德日刑法理论和刑事判例为中心. 武汉大学出版社.
赵俊甫. (2004). 过失实行行为研究. 中国刑事法杂志, (6).
张爱艳. (2010). 论监督过失责任. 山东社会科学, (5).
罗雨荔. (2022). 以过失实行行为为核心的监督过失认定. 甘肃政法大学学报, (6).
刘晗. (2015). 业务过失犯罪研究. 湖北警察学院学报, (5).
易益典. (2010). 论监督过失理论的刑法适用. 华东政法大学学报, (1).
高桥则夫. (2020). 刑法总论 (李世阳译). 中国政法大学出版社.
易益典. (2018). 监督过失型渎职犯罪的因果关系判断. 法学, (4).
马荣春, & 唐张. (2022). 监督过失因果性、注意义务与定罪实践. 河南财经政法大学学报, (1).
李紫阳. (2019). 监督过失型污染环境因果关系的判断. 河北法学, (8).
童德华, & 马嘉阳. (2020). 刑法中监督过失的适用条件及归属限制. 社会科学动态, (6).
周振杰, & 李泽华. (2022). 业务过失犯罪的实践检视与理论反思. 河南社会科学, (12).
姚佳. (2020). 知情同意原则抑或信赖授权原则——兼论数字时代的信用重建. 暨南学报（哲学社会科学版）, 42(2).
姜涛. (2021). 监督过失的限缩适用方案. 清华法学, (6).
周树超. (2021). 中国监督过失限制路径的审视与重构——兼评刘某玩忽职守案. 西部法学, (1).
李腾. (2020). 论信赖原则在监督管理过失犯罪中的功能定位与应用. 犯罪研究, (2).
王德运, & 李秀沛. (2011). 监督过失犯罪主体的司法认定. 中国检察官, (8).
