David Dyzenhaus and the Holy Grail

Abstract
In his book Hard Cases in Wicked Legal Systems David Dyzenhaus aims to provide a cogent refutation of legal positivism, and thus to settle a very old dispute in jurisprudence. His claim is that the consequences for practice and for morality if judges adopt positivist ideas in a wicked legal system are unacceptable. He discusses the South African legal system as a case in point. I argue that this claim is not secured. Dyzenhaus has three arguments for his view. The first is that positivism cannot account for legal principles, and legal principles are the key source of morally acceptable adjudication. I show that his argument does not go through for sophisticated positivist accounts of "principles" such as those of J. Raz and D. N. MacCormick. Dyzenhaus's second argument claims to find a pragmatic contradiction in positivism, between the belief in judicial discretion and the belief in a commitment to legislative sources as binding fact. I argue that there is no such commitment in a form that supports Dyzenhaus's theory. His final argument is that wicked legal systems are contrary to the very idea of law and legality. I argue that a strong doctrine of deference to legislative authority cannot be bad in itself: It can only be bad relative to a certain content to legislation. Thus Dyzenhaus's claim begs the question against positivism.     

Legal Theory for Legal Empiricists

There is a widespread view that one does either theory or empirical work, and that theory and empiricism represent distant concerns, opposing worldviews, and perhaps distinct mentalities or personalities. This prevalent view has deep roots and is also the result of pragmatic and understandable tendencies toward division of intellectual labor. Against this view, this essay suggests that the relations between theory and empirical study ought to be understood as more intimate and that making legal theory an explicit focus can improve empirical scholarship. We pursue this claim by articulating a basis for legal theory and by showing how that basis illuminates both the application and design of empirical research on law. Legal theory, we argue, follows jurisprudence in interrogating the law as a set of coercive normative institutions. The upshot of this approach is a recognition that an interdisciplinary analysis of law must rely on both a theory (explicit or implicit) of the way law's power and its normativity align and an account of the way in which this discursive cohabitation manifests itself institutionally. We thus argue that legal theory is necessary in order to draw fruitfully on empirical research and further claim that legal theory provides guidance both for setting up an empirical research agenda on law and for designing research into specific topics.     

On Necessary Relations Between Law and Morality*

Abstract. The author's thesis is that there is a conceptually necessary connection between law and morality which means legal positivism must fail as a comprehensive theory. The substantiation of this thesis takes place within a conceptual framework which shows that there are at least 64 theses to be distinguished, concerning the relationship of law and morality. The basis for the author's argument in favour of a necessary connection, is formed by the thesis that individual legal norms and decisions as well as whole legal systems necessarily make a claim to correctness. The explication of this claim within the frame of discourse theory shows that the law has a conceptually necessary, ideal dimension, which connects law with a procedural, universalistic morality.     

A European Constitution for Citizens: Reflections on the Rethinking of Union and Community Law

Whilst the European Union or Community is not a state and does not possess a political constitution in the sense of a series of irrevocable norms existing prior to and above Community or Union law, the evolution of the European legal system might nonetheless be regarded as a fundamental constitutional process. In this light, primary and secondary European law, together with the jurisprudence of the ECJ, might be said to be subjectivising certain specifically European principles thus contributing to the legal creation of sometimes novel rights for European Citizens. In a legal process similar to that seen within 19th Century Germany, European law is seeking a compensate for an incomplete political constitution through the development of a – second best – European Charter for Citizens.     

The boundaries of law and the purpose of legal philosophy

Many of the current debates in jurisprudence focus on articulating the boundaries of law. In this essay I challenge this approach on two separate grounds. I first argue that if such debates are to be about law, their purported subject, they ought to pay closer attention to the practice. When such attention is taken it turns out that most of the debates on the boundaries of law are probably indeterminate. I show this in particular with regard to the debate between inclusive and exclusive positivists: I present several ways of understanding what this debate is about and argue that none of them is defensible. My second argument focuses more on the purpose of jurisprudential inquiry. I argue there that even if some jurisprudential debates have determinate answers, it does not follow that they deserve our attention, because not all true facts are worth knowing. After discussing and rejecting the claim that jurisprudence could be justified as knowledge for its own sake, I propose one possible justification for engaging in legal philosophy and outline its implications for the kind of issues that should be pursued. Assistant Professor, University of Warwick School of Law. The Essay was presented in the Oxford Jurisprudence Discussion Group. I thank participants there for their comments.     

A Realist View of Hindu Law

Abstract. Hindu law represents one of the least known, yet most sophisticated traditions of legal theory and jurisprudence in world history. Hindu jurisprudential texts contain elaborate and careful philosophical reflections on the nature of law and religion. The nature of Hindu law as a tradition has been subject to some debate and some misunderstanding both within and especially outside of specialist circles. The present essay utilizes the familiar framework of legal realism to describe the fundamental concepts of law and legal procedure in Hindu jurisprudence. Questions about the place of natural law theory and legal positivism in relation to Hindu law are also considered.     

分析法学对行为概念的重建

民法学、刑法学及行政法学领域对行为概念的研究 ,为整个法学对行为概念体系的原理性构建提出了要求。分析法学 ,尤其是霍菲尔德的权利概念元形式的分析框架 ,提供了在法理学层面上构建行为概念体系的一种思路。按这一思路 ,行为概念有四种元形式 :事实行为、法律行为、合法行为和违法行为。它们与霍菲尔德提出的四种权利概念元形式一起构成八个法律基本元素 ,共同体现了法律的逻辑推理结构     

Directives in EU Legal Systems: Whose Norms Are They Anyway?

This article is concerned with whether the concept of a legal system—long a centrepiece of state‐based legal theories—is a useful conceptual tool in theorising the contemporary EU and its legal relations with its Member States. The focus lies particularly with EU directives, and with what the character and operation of this distinctive type of EU norm can tell us as regards the existence of and relations between legal systems in the EU. I argue for the view that the EU is comprised of distinct but interacting legal systems at EU and national level, and claim that the character and operation of directives supports this view. Throughout the discussion I try to bring the conceptual tools of analytical legal philosophy to bear on puzzles generated by EU law and its relations with national law, in order to show that a sound analysis of aspects of the EU can benefit from abstract legal philosophical reflection, and vice versa.     

法律原则、自由裁量与良法价值理念的构建

实证主义法学与新自然法学派博弈之论点在于法律是由单纯法律规则还是由法律规则、法律原则和政治道德构成的。实证主义法学在强调法律为双重规则统一体的基础上,承认包括法官造法意义上的自由裁量权的存在;而以德沃金为代表的新自然法学派则认为法律构成除规则外,还存在原则和政治道德等因素,且主张自由裁量行为是法官在法律规定幅度内的司法行为,如超越此圭臬,就是一种法官的恣意行为、不正义行为。两者在法律构成上的长期激烈争论,旨在证成何种构成模式的法能最大效应地体现人类社会所追求的公平、正义和秩序的规范价值理念,或言之,法律应具有何种有效体系,方能消除人治状态而实现良法之治。     

Legal Feminism and Foucault – A Critique of the Expulsion of Law

Contemporary theorists have become increasingly receptive to the selective incorporation of Foucaultian theory within feminist frameworks. However, the reception of Foucault within feminist legal critique has been less enthusiastic. The most celebrated theorist to argue for the incorporation of Foucaultian insight within the feminist analysis of law is Carol Smart. While conceding the significant contribution of her work, this article will argue that her interpretation of the Foucaultian thesis on law is considerably more problematic. Illustrating the extent to which she adopts an unnecessarily pessimistic prognosis for the development of Foucault within legal analysis and reform, this article will examine an emerging counter-interpretation of Foucault that presents the possibility for a more promising application, seeking to provide a defence both of the utility of Foucault for feminist jurisprudence, and of the utility of legal reform strategies being exercised for feminist purposes.     

约翰·奥斯丁法哲学再探

约翰·奥斯丁是现代西方法理学中的重要人物,分析法学的创始人,以提出"法律命令说"而著名,他的法哲学长期以来一直受到人们的批判,这些批判主要来自于两大阵营:一是形形色色的自然法学家;另一是一些后起的法律实证主义者。这些批判影响巨大,以致遮蔽了奥斯丁法哲学的本来面目。其实,"法律命令说"并非奥斯丁法哲学的核心与标志,纵使人们批驳倒了"法律命令说",对奥斯丁的法哲学整体来说损害也并不大。奥斯丁的代表性思想是:倡导对法律进行分析性研究,主张建构起一般法理学与法律教义学,最终使法学成为一门科学。在众多的批判之下,奥斯丁的上述代表性思想不仅没有失去生命力,反而保持着旺盛的生命力,以致在现代西方法理学中,奥斯丁仍然是一个人们无法绕过的思想家。     

Francovich and the Problem of the Disobedient State

Abstract: This paper is an attempt to evaluate the rapidly expanding line of jurisprudence which derives from Francovich and Bonifaci v Italian Republic (Cases 6, 9190). The paper argues that there is a serious mismatch between the priorities of the EC and national legal orders and that the impact of the superior order on national legal systems may be both unexpected and detrimental. Section I argues: that the theoretical underpinnings for state liability in EC law are in fact weak and raise objections of principle; that 'infection' of national liability systems by the new principle is both inevitable and problematic; and that damage may be caused to the EC liability system through 'cross-infection'. Section II argues that in the modern state, balance between the Rule of Law doctrine and principles of political and democratie supremacy are both hard to attain and inevitably the subject of controversy. This problem is heightened within the Community by the existence of competing legislative systems, lack of clarity over sovereignty and worries over democratic deficit. The contribution of Francovich to the resolution of these problems is largely negative.     

法理学还要与部门法学疏离多久——以桑本谦先生的法律解释理论为分析视角

传统的建构型法律解释学和桑本谦先生所主张的解构型法律解释学都面临困境,而从部门法制度和部门法实践的角度来看,法律解释学并非无药可救。法律解释学的发展必然是和法律制度的发展、部门法实践的发展、法律共同体的发展乃至法治的发展联系在一起的。抽象的法理学建构和抽象的法理学解构都具有局限性。法理学视野下法律解释学所面临的困境,其实质是中国法理学所面临的困境,而造成这种困境的原因就在于法理学一直以来对部门法学所采取的疏离态度。     

法的合法性与整全性的关联分析

法律资格纷争成为英美法理学传统的一道难题,对这一问题的回答形成了不同法学流派。从法的合法性判准的不同模式出发,证立整全性不仅可以进入法的合法性判准的行列,而且必然成为当下法的合法性判准的最佳选择。这一必然的最佳选择基于整全性在理论上符合法律的终极目的,即最高指令——人类"善"的生活,在法律实践中实现了平等尊重和普遍的人文关怀,只有这样的法律才是理想型的法律。如果这一论证结论确实可行,那么,我们就可以超越哈特与德沃金关于法律概念之争,终结和平息不同法学流派对法律资格的纷争。对于法律资格的回答将聚焦于法的合法性和整全性的关联考察,其对法理学的重述将开辟新的理论疆场。     

论式：法律逻辑研究的新方向

当我们将审视焦点从法律三段论的外貌转向其内在要素——事实前提和法律前提,并进一步寻找这些前提的支撑基础时,一个全新的法律论证结构暴露出来：若干可能的或合情理的论证（合情论证、论证型式、论式推理）支持两个前提,使得我们有理由假定到目前为止对两个前提没道理怀疑。然而,亚里士多德于分析性推理理论之外开创的并在中世纪传统中广泛应用的论式理论系统,被现代逻辑理论和法律逻辑理论遗忘了。幸运的是,上世纪50年代以来,敏锐的逻辑学者和法律学者,分别在法律领域和逻辑领域复兴了论式理论。当代关于论式的界定、功能、结构、分类、评估、经验基础和文化特异性的研究已在多个学科展开,初步形成了论式理论的基本框架。一种周全、可应用的法律逻辑有必要整合法学＂论题学＂和论式的逻辑理论,以丰富法律逻辑的内容与方法。     

Labor Regulation,Corporate Governance,and Legal Origin: A Case of Institutional Complementarity?

We explore the influential claim that "legal origin"—the historical origin of a given national legal system in the common law or civil law—accounts for a significant degree of cross-national diversity in economic regulation and development. We show that the claim is undermined by problems in index construction and by a misreading of the implications of the common law/civil law divide for the respective roles of courts and legislatures in law making. We argue that a critical factor, instead, was the timing of industrialization in relation to the emergence of legal institutions associated with the modern business enterprise (the employment relationship and the joint stock company). We also show how distinctive "legal cultures" of the common law and civil law have played a part in setting national systems on separate pathways to economic development.     

股权分置改革中的行政授予与补偿协商:公法与私法的融合

中国的股权分置改革一方面要使非流通股股东取得流通权,另一方面也要让流通股股东获得合理补偿以求改革能够稳定推进。传统观点下的契约理论和行政征收理论均不能适切解释中国的股权分置改革方案。在公、私法融合背景下,美国学者新近提出的行政授予(regulatory givings)学说,可与大陆法上的行政行为附款理论相互协力,为股权分置改革方案提供正当性基础。应须指出,中国的改革方案通过非流通股股东和流通股股东协商的方式进行估价和实现补偿,采用财产法则而非补偿法则保障流通股股东的权益,实属符合经济效率之举。然而,本方案仍有诸多值得改进之处。     

法的一般理论及其在中国的发展

法的一般理论作为法学研究的独立分支起源于19世纪中后叶的德国,并在英美和其他国家得到广泛扩散和发展。在前苏联,经过马克思主义哲学的改造,它从一种分析法理论转型为一种社会法理论。中国法理学界对于法的一般理论的继受与发展经过了上个世纪50年代至60年代初对苏联学说的全面继受、80年代初至90年代末期的反思与突破,以及90年代末至今的开放与创新三个阶段,并逐步让位于法哲学和其他交叉学科的研究范式。以法律关系学说的变迁为线索进行梳理总结,可以发现,中国的法的一般理论研究与中国法治实践和法学进步的历史进程休戚相关,在总体框架上深受"苏联学说+民法原型"模式的影响,在研究方法上从采取单一进路开始显现出多种方法合力的端倪。法的一般理论远远没有成为"历史的遗迹",深化对它的研究应成为未来中国法理学的重要着力点。