走向现代刑法:违法性认识的规范展开

在"刑民不分"的前现代法律中,"不知法不免责"之"法",主要是伦理法、民商法,"责"则主要是采客观归责的侵权责任.而在"刑民有别"的现代法律中,由"前置法定性与刑事法定量相统一"的法益保护和不法制裁的部门法层级结构和比例分配所决定,客观构成要件中的规范要素以前置法的规范评价为核心,相应地,行为之前置法不法性认识乃主观构...     

常识、常理在司法中的运用

正确理解常识和常理,对司法裁判具有重大意义。常识和常理属于人们的的经验性知识,具有前理性、非系统性、经验性、大众性乃至客观性等特征。在司法中,常识和常理是法官认识案情、解释法律、展开逻辑推理的前提和基础。法官可以运用常识、常理认定案件事实,检验和校正法律推理。常识和常理还是法官进行法律论证的资源之一。但是,不能过于夸大常识和常理在司法中的作用。     

论法官直接认知与司法鉴定的界分

法官直接认知是法官直接对本案适用的法律、相关待证事实无需当事人举证证明或者在当事人举证已经达至证明标准时,直接加以确认形成内心确信的情形。司法鉴定是请求专家对案件事实或者证据事实出具相关意见的一种辅助证明活动。在我国的司法实践中存在着逃避法官直接认知而滥用司法鉴定的不良现象,应当在理论、立法和司法上准确理解法官直接认知和司法鉴定的功能与范围,二者不可简单替代,尤其不能以司法鉴定代替法官直接认知。     

英国人身伤害之非金钱损失赔偿度研究——兼论对我国相关制度的构建

在英国的侵权法体系中,人身伤害之非金钱损失的两大类型是“疼痛和痛苦”和“安乐生活的丧失”。在人身伤害的案件中,受害人可基于这类损失的发生获得赔偿。对于这些损失的存在及其程度的认定,不是从伤害的发生推定出来的,而是在对个案的情况进行考察的基础上确定的。为便于这一领域赔偿金的确定,英国的司法研究委员会提出了一些供参考的因素。现今已经取得的广泛共识是,在“情节较严重的案件”中,应当增加赔偿金的数额。关于赔偿金支付的时间的法律适用,有人建议应当允许受害人在一次性支付和分期支付之间进行选择。     

论“因侵权而犯罪”与“因犯罪而侵权”

刑事侵权具备"刑事责任"、"侵权责任"双重责任属性,由于刑、民责任在发展进程、互动的路径及效果上的不同,可分化为"因侵权而犯罪"与"因犯罪而侵权",即刑事侵权二分论。"因侵权而犯罪"具有民事责任倾向性,"因犯罪而侵权"具有刑事责任倾向性,解决刑事侵权责任问题须兼顾侵权责任法与刑事法的正义要求。刑民二分论有坚实的法律基础,符合法律价值基础的要求,当刑事责任与侵权责任进行内容接轨与功能互补时,可在实践中实现预期的价值目标和社会效益的最大化。     

侵权责任法与社会法关系研究

侵权责任法如果不与其他法律领域联动就很难解决损害与赔偿的问题,社会法正是由侵权责任法的边界区域进入传统的私法秩序中而发展起来的。一些广泛的政策性考量催生了与侵权责任法的私法性相异质的规范体,公法因素渗透进来并使其呈现出社会化的发展趋向。侵权责任法一直扮演着社会冲突的"雷达"角色,成为了正在显现的危险得以早期发现和预警的一种探测机制,进而成为更能有效解除社会冲突和社会危机的社会法的低级伙伴。社会法说服了侵权责任法朝向集体责任的发展方向,培植了侵权责任法认同社会团结与合作的文化基因。侵权责任法与社会法之间更为深刻的关系还在于权利与权力、义务与责任蕴含着政治性、经济性和文化性的制度基因。     

Judicial authority through the experiences of crisis

This article is concerned with law’s experiences and making sense of crisis. When we talk about law’s response to crisis, we refer to law not as an abstract set of rules but as an embodied and animated assemblage of relations and practices. This way, law needs to make sense of any crisis to respond to it. The article draws on cultural legal studies to explore the constitution of judicial authority in the context of a democracy in flux. The article relies on fieldwork data collected in the interviews conducted by the author with Lithuanian judges in 2019. Highest in more than two decades, public trust in the judiciary in 2018 indicated a remarkable achievement for Lithuania, a country whose judicial system had been in a state of flux since the end of the Soviet era. However, after an unprecedented and highly mediated judicial corruption scandal in 2019, the rates of public trust plummeted, uncovering complex dynamics between the image of courts, mass media, and the public. Against this backdrop, the article explores how judges make sense of crisis that develops on the intersections of provocative reality judging and formal judicial institutions. It shows how judicial authority is constituted in the conditions of crisis on the tension between law and culture. Emerging from a crisis of authority is the changing face of judging. A post-colonial vantage point and theatrical jurisprudence are used to respond to a development of a desire of power under a mask of rationality, objectivity, and universality. The article concludes by contemplating how this authority shapes our lifeworlds.

     

中国侵权法四十年

改革开放至今四十年,中国侵权法立法与司法解释的制定经过了四个发展阶段,当下正在进行的是作为第四个阶段的民法典分编侵权责任编的编纂。四十年来,中国侵权法的研究也取得了丰硕的成果,出版了大量的教科书、体系书与专著,也翻译了不少美国、日本以及欧洲的重要侵权法著作。理论创新方面,主要体现在侵权法与债法分离、一般条款理论、违法性与过错的关系、相当因果关系说的引入、多数人侵权责任体系的建构与完善、死者人格利益的保护、安全保障义务理论、医疗损害责任的统一、机动车交通事故责任以及损害赔偿法等方面。     

Revolution Blues: The Reconstruction of Health and Safety Law as ‘Common‐sense’ Regulation

This article reviews the last five years of coalition government policy making in relation to occupational health and safety law. It shows that the most significant and influential element of this activity has been the reframing of the wider regulatory system according to a dominant ideological paradigm of ‘common‐sense’ regulation, to the detriment of other considerations and interests. A social constructionist framework assists in setting out the means through which this new ‘symbolic universe’ of regulatory possibility has been constructed and promulgated within the policymaking arena. In particular, it identifies the key role played by processes of deliberative regulatory engagement in the construction and development of this approach, and identifies the inherent vulnerability of ‘thin’ forms of deliberation to this sort of application.     

中国刑事证据制度新象——我国刑事证据制度的新发展

证据是司法公正的基石。刑事诉讼活动首先就是收集、审查、判断、运用证据认定案件事实的过程,在准确认定案件事实的基础上正确适用法律,案件才能得到公正处理。而建立和健全证据规贝。才能保证合法、客观、全面地收集证据,正确地审查判断证据,使证据所认定的案件事实符合事实真相。因此,证据规则是否健全是体现一个国家诉讼制度民主化程度及法治程度的重要标志。     

论具有人格利益的财产

The traditional theory of property and tort law generally denies personality interests in property. In recent years, legislative and judicial practices at home and abroad have turned to care for personality interests in property and to protect it. The property with personality interests can be classified into four categories, namely, (a) property with personality symbolism, (b) property with specific human emotion, (c) property originated from specific human body, and (d) intellectual property from specific human wisdom, the first two of which internalize external matters and the last two externalize the inherent self. Comparing with fungible property, the property with personality interests on the basic of facts and law shall be more protected in legislative and judicial practices. Zhou Qiong, Ph.D. of law, studies at Huazhong University of Science and Technology. She also serves as editor of the Private Law Review. Ms Zhou’s research interests focus on civil law in general and tort law in particular. She has released several articles on civil law and science & technology law, and she is also one of the co-authors of Science and Technology Law (Hep, 2006). Moreover, she got the title of Top Ten Academic Achievements from Huazhong University of Science and Technology (2007).     

刑事诉讼中的刑事政策:以社会理论为基础的分析理路(一个导论)

中国刑事司法实践基本上一直沿袭着旧有的刑事政策以及与此有关的惯习操作 ,在程序上与刑事诉讼的法治化要求多有抵牾 ,刑事政策的合理化是以“自上而下”的权力型改革模式作为推动刑事诉讼法治化的根本动力。虽然刑事政策逐渐受到学者的关注 ,但因囿于价值判断和视野局限而造成对社会事实缺乏有效的分析 ,所以 ,对“理解”中国刑事司法的问题助益无多。而以一定的社会理论为分析理路 ,或许是研究刑事诉讼中的刑事政策的一种可行的方法     

我国涉外一般侵权法律适用实证研究——以346份裁判文书为中心

随着国际经济贸易和文化往来的增多,我国涉外侵权案件的数量越来越多,然而我国关于涉外一般侵权的法律适用还存在很多问题。从实证角度研究分析《涉外民事法律关系法律适用法》第44条在我国的具体实践情况十分必要。通过分析研究从2018年1月1日到2019年3月29日为止的一共346份裁判文书,并根据地区、案由分布、当事人类型和法律选择的方法将其进行分类,发现我国涉外一般侵权法律适用案件司法实践存在第44条被扩大化适用、毫无理由罗列法条、常见法律适用顺序错误、错误理解法条中规定的意思自治原则、说理不充分和意思自治原则在海事侵权案件中适用较多等问题。为完善我国涉外一般侵权法律适用司法实践的现状,我国应充分发挥意思自治原则、修改法条措辞语序、加强对法官的培养和增强筛选指导性案例等。     

Plays,Performances and Power Struggles – Examining Copyright's ‘Integrity’ in the Field of Theatre

This article explores the notion of ‘integrity’ under copyright law by analysing examples of 'integrity‐based objections' in the field of theatre. These objections typically involve playwrights objecting to changes being made to their copyright works by other parties, such as directors and actors. This analysis is deepened by the use of two concepts from the field of art theory – ‘aura’, as put forward by Walter Benjamin, and ‘trajectory’, as outlined by Bruno Latour and Adam Lowe. Finally, to shed further light on the issues raised, the work of Pierre Bourdieu is used to present new empirical research recently undertaken by the author in the field of UK theatre. This research demonstrates that ‘power struggles’ are a common feature of theatrical collaboration; that copyright is deeply implicated in the way such power struggles are conceived; and moreover, that resolving these power struggles successfully – including taking account of ‘integrity‐based objections’ – is crucial to theatrical practice.     

医疗纠纷民事案件处理的发展——从“事故论”向“侵权论”的转变

在我国现代历史上。“医疗事故”这一词汇经历了从新闻语言向卫生管理语言、卫生立法语言以及民事、刑事立法语言演变的过程。由于国情和社会制度的特点．卫生行政部门长时间强势主导“医疗事故”事件的处理．也使“医疗事故”概念深深地植入于我国法官的思维之中．对法院民事审判理念产生了深刻地影响作用。因我国医学界、法学界和审判实务界等对于医疗纠纷的法律处理制度和观点分歧之大，超越了其他各国和我国台湾、香港地区的法学认识．以致形成了独特的医学法律观点——即“事故论”和“侵权论”。近年来随着民事法律思想的深入研究以及对侵权法律概念的进一步认识．具有浓厚卫生行政色彩的“医疗事故”概念逐渐退出民事审判的舞台．侵权思想已经逐步回归，充分体现了我国民事法律和民事审判的进步。     

Law-making functions of the Chinese courts: Judicial activism in a country of rapid social changes

The judicial production of law and the legislative production of law make a striking distinction between the two legal traditions. Despite of these differences, judges in both legal traditions in adjudicating cases have a common task, which is the application of legal rules to the facts of cases pending for judgments. The tension between the certainty and the “discretion” is universal for any legal system and, to a certain extent, it poses a hard dilemma for the rhetoric of rule of law. In the transitional countries such as China where rapid social changes and transformations take place, the judiciary and judges can not escape from taking more active roles in interpreting or even law making process. It arouses much controversy, particularly in continental legal traditions, for the judiciary is deemed to perform a mechanical role in adjudicating cases. This article intends to analyze the needs for judicial law-making function in China and its reasons. It reveals that judicial interpretation constitutes an important source of law despite its ambiguous legislative position. The article argues that judicial activism is inevitable against the transitional nature of current Chinese society.     

最高人民法院关于无效行政行为的探索

最高人民法院从司法审查引发出对无效行政行为制度的探索,虽没有使用“自始没有任何法律效力”和“无效”等概念,却在民事诉讼领域形成了有关基础行为的构成要件,在对行政行为的司法审查中形成了重大明显瑕疵的类型化和明显性判断标准,并形成了排除具有重大明显瑕疵行政行为公定力、相对人拘束力和司法强制执行力的无效行政行为制度雏形,为我国今后立法积累了丰富的素材。从最高人民法院的探索轨迹及其重大明显瑕疵的类型化,可以发现无效行政行为规则的鲜明中国特色,司法的制度生成意义和生成机制。     

The ‘Reasonable Man’, his Nineteenth‐century ‘Siblings’, and their Legacy

The reasonable man is the best known, but not the only, legal construct to be born into the nineteenth‐century common law. This article introduces the man's siblings – including those from the areas of trust law, criminal law, contract law, and intellectual property law (both patents and trademarks). The fact that some of these ‘men’ changed the law is not controversial; this research further highlights that while several of these came to life in that century, only some had a significant role into the twentieth century. Those that did are tied to the foundations of our society through their role in facilitating innovation and consumer protection. The argument is that it was the constructs’ nature and their capacity to accommodate public policy issues that enabled the vitality of the ‘reasonable person ‘ (negligence) and the ‘person skilled in the art’ (patents).