我国冲突法立法应拓展意思自治原则的适用范围

从冲突法的价值取向上分析,以往我国学界对当事人意思自治原则根基的认识失之狭隘,往往仅笼统地论及该原则的正义性,而没有将之细分为“冲突正义”和“实体正义”加以考察,更没有明确涉猎“冲突效率”和“实体效率”之价值取向。正因为当事人意思自治原则将正义与效率融于一炉,故其在冲突法中的存在和发展较之其它冲突规范具有明显的“比较优势”。有鉴于此,在不损害国家利益和社会政策的前提下,我国冲突法立法应拓展当事人意思自治原则的适用范围,并将当事人默示同意选择法院地法的自治权利扩大至更为广泛的法律冲突领域。     

南非法院对涉外离婚案件管辖权的确定

在1979年的《离婚法》实施前,南非法院主要根据普通法规则来确定对涉外离婚案件的管辖权,即由当事人的住所地法院对离婚诉讼行使管辖。在《离婚法》实施后,根据该法,南非法院可以根据任一方当事人的住所地或通常居所地为由来对涉外离婚诉讼行使管辖。     

法院附设ADR的效益困境与出路——从法院附设ADR的效益诉求看中国诉讼调解制度的改革与完善

法院附设ADR以其固有的效益诉求性,在当今各国受到广泛的重视,成为诉讼之外的重要的纠纷解决手段。然而作为诉讼的补充性手段,法院附设ADR一旦失败,当事人的纠纷就还得依赖诉讼进行解决。这样,不但其效益诉求没有发挥作用,还造成了双重成本的浪费,这种情况即所谓法院附设ADR的"效益困境"。本文指出走出效益困境的唯一出路,就是在不改变ADR的效益优势和不剥夺当事人的诉权的条件下,提高法院附设ADR对当事人的约束效力,尽量避免ADR的失败。     

法院证据调查与当事人主义

我国审判方式改革在批判超职权主义观念的基础上,主张向当事人主义的目标发展,大大削弱了法官依据职权调查证据的权力。本文通过对大陆法系和英美法系的当事人主义诉讼模式的分析发现,对真实的追求是民事诉讼的真谛,当事人主义并不排斥法院实施证据调查。我国应当通过法院证据调查制度的规范化促进司法者能动地输出司法正义。     

再论司法与仲裁的关系--关于法院应否监督仲裁实体内容的立法与实践模式及理论思考

法院应否监督仲裁的实体内容 ,理论界向有争议。通说认为 ,法院只能在监督与不监督之间选择 ,但目前有关国家的立法与实践已提供了多种选择模式 ,包括法院强制监督仲裁实体的模式、任意监督仲裁实体的模式、不监督仲裁实体的模式、原则上不监督但在当事人协议同意时可监督仲裁实体的模式。本文赞同上述最后一种监督模式 ,因为该模式体现了对当事人意思自治的充分尊重 ,同时又在仲裁的价值取向上达成了仲裁的终局性与公正性之间的平衡。本文还认为 ,中国的仲裁立法改革应超越“程序监督论”与“实体监督论” ,还当事人真正的意思自治权。     

论经济法的理念

秉承了大陆法系传统,从“无法无天”时代一路走来的中国,曾几何时,由对法的渴求、向往,演化为法的形式崇拜:似乎法即法条、立法,“形式正义”、“法律真实”至上而置实质正义、客观真实于不顾,将公法与私法、民事与行政、“市民社会”与“政治国家”截然对立,达到了无以复加的地步。这在经济关系的法律调整中表现尤甚。诸如在法庭设置中令民事和行政严格分野、非“民”即“行(政)”,导致土地、国企、商标、产业政策推行、政府涉足经济的管理等亦公亦私的纷争无从适当司法;一个政府采购合同分拆为两个诉讼,无奈一方当事人在行政诉讼中胜诉、却在民事诉讼中败诉,两个判决冲突,无法执行,在同一个案子中都做不到“法制统一”;又有法院在侵权纠纷案中判决一方当事人胜诉,却声称产品不合标准的事属政府主管,法院不能责令他方当事人停止侵权行为,只好让其继续贻害他人和社会;在公司法、物权法等的修订或起草中,总有人无视社会现实,希望推开或绕过国有财产管理经营问题,将其弄成纯粹的民法或商法,等等。这些,已对社会主义市场经济秩序造成了难以愈合的伤害。这一切,皆可归结为缺乏适当的理念之故。缺乏公平、衡平、正义、诚信的理念,就没有法和法治,徒有其表的立法、法条、法袍何益之有。缺乏公私交融,官民     

程序正义的第一道屏障

民事案件的管辖既涉及当事人诉讼公平、便利的私益,也涉及法院裁判正确、迅速的公益,本身便是程序正义的一部分。管辖还是实体正义的前提,管辖一旦出了问题,审判的公正便难以保证。从这个角度而言,说管辖是司法公正的“第一道生命线”并不为过。为规范级别管辖制度,保障当事人管辖利益,维护级别管辖秩序,2009年11月30日,     

法官打律师：提示人大监督

3月28日，北京律师王令受11名天津当事人委托，与当事人一起前往天津市南开区人民法院办理立案手续。在与该法院行政庭庭长王学林交涉时，双方就法院是否应予以立案产生分歧。当王令律师问王学林庭长能不能代表法院时．王庭长语出惊人：“我就是法院，法院就是我，我说不立案，就是不立案。”当王令律师向当事人表示要让当事人在其向上级法院反映此事时为今天发生的事情作证时，王学林庭长的反应更是令人瞠目。只见他对王令律师一打（拳击）、二揪（领子）、三掐（脖子），在正义天平的属地，捍卫法律的场所，上演了一出全武行。事发后，南开区法院矢口否认法官打人之说．天津市高级人民法院于4月22日成立了调查组．最高人民法院院长肖扬也专门就此作出批示．要求实事求是地处理（据《华夏时报》）。此事一经媒体报道，舆论顿时一片哗然。     

法院调解“调审分离”改革思路的批判性研究

法院调解是以当事人为中心的程序公正的最好体现,一个以当事人主义为基础的诉讼程序必然重视调解的价值。对“调审分离”改革的思路进行理性分析有助于我们厘清法院调解与审判程序改革的关系,重新审视当事人主义模式下法院调解的性质和定位,这是对法院调解制度的重塑,更是对其理念的全面检讨。     

海峡两岸法院附设ADR机制比较——以厦门法院涉台民商事纠纷非诉解决机制设计为例

法院附设ADR有两个最主要的特征,即法院在纠纷解决的主导作用,即当事人将纠纷诉请法院解决时,法院以建议、指令的方式将其引导到ADR机构以非诉讼的方式解决,同时依当事人的申请,通过司法确认程序赋予调解协议强制执行力。法院附设ADR,不仅是一种纠纷处理的流程,也是一种松散式的组织体系。     

论随机法庭的创建

司法公正是社会公正的保障,司法公正有赖司法独立,法官独立又是司法独立的核心。法官独立可以通过随机法庭的建立可得到现有体制下最大限度的实现。由当事人参与选择的随机法庭具有加强人权保障、节省诉讼成本、排除内外干扰、提高司法诚信度、增强审判权威等多种积极意义。     

Judicial Career Incentives and Court Performance: An Empirical Study of the German Labour Courts of Appeal

This paper examines how the organization of a civil-law judiciary—the German labour court system—shapes court performance. It is argued that civil-law judiciaries can be considered as internal labour markets in which the main incentive derives from career opportunities. Resulting hypotheses are tested on data for nine German Labour Courts of Appeal (Landesarbeitsgerichte) over the period 1980–1998. Two performance measures are computed: the confirmation rate and a productivity measure. The confirmation rate captures how often decisions are upheld in an appeal at the Federal Labour Court. Court productivity is measured by a score derived via data envelopment analysis (DEA) and includes as outputs the number of finished cases and the number of published decisions. Regression analyses show: Courts employing more judges with a Ph.D. are more productive, but write decisions that are less often confirmed by the Federal Labour Court. Courts employing judges with higher ex ante promotion probabilities are less productive and write decisions that are less often confirmed.JEL Classification: J45, K31, M12     

论民事司法鉴定制度的修改与完善——以新《民事诉讼法》为视角

新的《民事诉讼法》对鉴定制度做出了重大的调整与修改,这对于提高司法鉴定的质量、保障当事人的诉讼权利、提高法官证据采信能力、促进司法公正的实现均具有重要的价值.但仍然存在一些问题和不足,应当通过限制法院依职权直接选任鉴定人、明确鉴定人出庭质证和对异地鉴定人出庭质证等措施加以完善.     

The decline of civil jury trial in nineteenth-century England

The nineteenth century saw the beginning of the decline of jury trial as the main dispositive mechanism in civil cases in the Superior Courts. The Common Law Procedure Act 1854 gave civil litigants the choice of jury trial, and during the remainder of the century the proportion of litigants choosing jury trial steadily declined. However, the seeds of this decline were sown in the two decades prior to 1854, during which time three factors combined to undermine the institution of the civil jury: recognition among lawyers of the integrity of the bench, the efforts made by lawyers to professionalize the practise of law, and the successful introduction in 1846 of juryless trials in the County Courts.     

Enforcement of rehabilitation for politically persecuted persons during the Soviet occupation of Germany in the terms of the international Covenant on civil and political rights

Nineteen authors have filed a communication to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights against Germany and the Russian Federation to enforce rehabilitation of their legal predecessors, who were victims of denazification (Russian: Денацификация) measures in Post-War Germany. They reprimand that they and the persons concerned are discriminated by the current German legislation against all other groups of comparably politically persecuted persons on the territory of the former Soviet Occupation Zone of Germany (Russian: Coвeтcкaя oккyпaциoннaя зoнa Гepмaнии), being excluded from the scope of the existing rehabilitation acts, which have come into force after the German Reunification. Whilst any other persecutees can be rehabilitated according to the existing rehabilitation acts (Criminal Rehabilitation Act and Administrative Rehabilitation Act), and whilst victims of denazification measures in the former Western Occupations Zones had been enabled to enforce their rehabilitation in the terms of German acts in the years between 1951 until 1955 after the foundation of the Federal Republic of Germany, those persons who were victims of denazification measures in the former Soviet Occupation Zone are excluded from any rehabilitation. This exclusion is justified by the German legislator and the Federal Constitutional Court with the argument that otherwise the former USSR would not have agreed to the German Reunification.     

错误的生命之诉的法律适用

错误的生命之诉是近年来出现的一种新型诉讼。目前,法国、美国五个州的最高法院准许了原告就此提起的财产损害赔偿请求,而英国、美国19个州的最高法院、加拿大的两个省、德国联邦宪法法院均驳回了原告的损害赔偿请求。但实际上,全部或部分驳回原告方诉讼请求所持的理由并不成立,原告的确受到了侵害,受侵害的客体是拥有充分知情的父母的利益。     

浅谈行政强制执行的分配模式及划分标准

要制定一部系统、完整的行政强制执行法,首先要寻找一种适合国情的行政强制执行模式,在多种模式中,混合式行政强制执行模式应是当前我国最佳的一种模式,而此种模式的建立的关键是要解决好人民法院和行政机关之间的行政强制执行权限的合理分配及划分标准。     

Perceptions of Remote and Walk‐In Service Delivery in Family Law Cases

In recent years, the number of litigants representing themselves without legal counsel has increased across the United States. Courts have responded by creating programs and services to help litigants represent themselves. Self‐help centers nationwide use different models to deliver legal advice and information to unrepresented litigants. Some offer court‐based, walk‐in self‐help centers. Others provide services remotely via phone, web, email, video conferencing, and live chat. In Maryland, self‐help center services are offered at walk‐in centers and remotely by phone and live chat. This article examines litigants' perceptions of in‐person and remote delivery of legal advice and information on family law matters. Results revealed that all three service delivery methods have high satisfaction rates, but chat users were less likely to feel as though they knew what to do next. They were also less optimistic about their case than were phone or in‐person users.     

Communication in family court: financial remedy proceedings from the perspective of litigants in person

The article presents a rationale for communicative, conceptual, cognitive and procedural challenges experienced by litigants in person in financial remedy proceedings. The article also explores oscillation between written and spoken legal genres and narrative development strategies which litigants in person have to use throughout different stages (from the early stages of starting proceedings, filling in court forms and providing documentation, through the negotiation process to interaction in court). While legal professionals express themselves in paradigmatic legal mode influenced by legal acts and legislation, litigants in person tend to express themselves in narrative mode similar to everyday storytelling. The objective is to investigate obstacles litigants in person experience during the process originally designed by legal professionals for legal professionals. The article evaluates different options for empowering lay people involved in legal proceedings and argues for the need to provide more specific support for different stages of family proceedings.     

Using Rule 11 Sanctions to Punish Accusers Who Make False Allegations of Child Sexual Abuse in Custody and Divorce Cases

False claims of child sexual abuse negatively affect the accused parent and the child. Such false claims can be used to sway custody determinations and cause frivolous applications to the court. This Note proposes that courts impose sanctions, comparable to those set forth in Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on litigants who make false claims of child sexual abuse.