我们需要什么样的民法总则--与德国民法比较

我国民法体系与德国民法体系有重大差异,根本原因是立法理念和思路不同。德国民法体系是以权利为核心构建的,所反映的法律关系理论属于“权利关系”阶段的理论。我国民法是以法律关系为核心构建的,所反映的法律关系理论属于“权利义务责任关系”阶段的理论。从立法技术上看,我国民法体系与德国民法体系有重大差异的根源在于,民法上责任的概念和内涵及责任与义务的关系有重大差异。由于《德国民法典》是以权利为核心构建的,请求权在民法中占有十分重要的地位。我国民法体系是以法律关系为核心构建的,体现为以权利———义务———责任为主线,我国民法上请求权的功能与德国民法上请求权的功能不同。     

论国家机关处理个人信息的合法性基础

我国个人信息保护法对国家机关处理个人信息作出了特别规定,但未明文解释其适用对象或澄清处理的合法性基础。个人信息保护领域的国家机关应采广义,除了通常的国家机关,还包括法律、法规授权提供公共服务的组织和规章授权组织。根据我国个人信息保护法第13条和民法典第1036条,国家机关处理个人信息具有多元的合法性基础:法定基础包括履行法定职责所必需,订立、履行合同或人事管理所必需,为应急所必需,合理处理已自愿或合法公开的个人信息,法律、行政法规规定的其他情形;意定基础指取得个人同意;酌定基础指为维护公共利益或者信息主体合法权益而合理处理个人信息。不同的合法性基础对应不同的告知同意规则,需准确理解适用。     

个人信息权的体系化解释——兼论《个人信息保护法》的公法属性

《个人信息保护法》是数字时代个人信息保护的基本法。它采取了将个人信息权作为新兴公法权利的思路,确立了完整的个人信息权利保护体系,在个人信息保护问题上和《民法典》一起形成了公私法共同协力的进路。《个人信息保护法》以权利束的方式规定了个人信息主体的知情权、决定权、查阅权、复制权、更正权、删除权、可携带权和信息权利救济权等。《个人信息保护法》从立法依据、权利体系、条文设计和规制措施上都体现出鲜明的公法属性,这也可以从基本权利的双重面向和个人信息国家保护义务得到理论上的证成。这部法律是数字时代公法秩序的基石,它对公法边界的形塑仍需通过其实施来确立。     

The minor's right of privacy: limitations on state action after Danforth and Carey.

The current status of the minor's right of privacy is examined, and the possible interests of parents and the state in controlling the minor's childbearing decisions is evaluated. Attention is directed to the development of an adult right of privacy and the potential barriers blocking its full extension to minors. The impact of the Danforth and Carey decisions extended the right of privacy to protect a minor's childbearing decisions from unwarranted state interference, and the constitutionality of statues that predicate a minor's abortion or contraceptive decision on either prior parental notification or parental judicial approval. The scope and vitality of the protection afforded by the Danforth and Carey decisions will be largely undermined if a minor's fundamental decisions are held to be constitutionally subject to parental or judicial review. State-mandated involvement of 3rd parties, aside from the minor's attending physician, in the decision to prevent or terminate pregnancy serves no significant state interest. Rather such restrictions impermissibly subject minors to the dangers of pregnancy and childbirth. Additionally, by selectively burdening only those childbearing decisions which result in the prevention or termination of pregnancy, parental consent, consultation, and notification requirements violate the Roe decision's insistence on a neutral state policy towards the outcome of fundamental personal choices. In sum, state-assisted parental or judicial intervention in the minor's childbearing decisions unconstitutionally limits the protection granted by the right of privacy.     

Minors' capacity to refuse treatment: a reply to Gilmore and Herring

Re R and Re W allow a parent to consent to treatment a competent minor refuses, but the cases have not been tested post-Human Rights Act 1998. Gilmore and Herring offer a means by which they might be distinguished or sidelined. They interpret Gillick to say that in order to consent a minor need only have a full understanding of the particular treatment. They argue that the minors in Re R and Re W were refusing all treatment which requires a separate assessment of capacity-an assessment which was not made. We fear that this distinction would not be workable in clinical practice and argue that their interpretation of Gillick is flawed. From a clinician's point of view, competence cannot always be judged in relation to a specific treatment, but instead must relate to the decision. We show that a decision can incorporate more than one treatment, and more than one decision might be made about one treatment. A minor's understanding of a specific treatment is not always sufficient to demonstrate competence to make a decision. The result is that whilst there might be situations when a parent and a minor both have the power to consent to a particular treatment, they will not share concurrent powers in relation to the same decision. Consequently, a challenge to Re R and Re W, if forthcoming, would need to take a different form. We emphasise the necessity to minimise the dichotomy between legal consent and how consent works in medical practice.     

Claiming "Victim" to Harassment Law: Legal Consciousness of the Privileged

Sociologists of law have long been concerned with the effectiveness of rights; the emergence of diversity training in the 1990s spurred renewed attention to questions of how laws are enacted in daily life. Much scholarship has constructed the managerialization of civil rights law and popularization of diversity concepts as diluting efforts to redress structural discrimination. In studying diversity and antiharassment trainings in practice, I argue that these are sites where civil rights find expression of their obligations, and I find that much of the "dilution" of content stems from diversity trainers' efforts to negotiate with the resistance of trainees to their new obligations under civil rights law. The trainees evince a variable legal consciousness in relationship to this legality of rights-promotion, to which they are being exposed in these trainings; the findings suggest further research is needed into the legal consciousness of the privileged.     

Immunity from criminal prosecution for parents who withhold medically necessary treatment from children on religious grounds

Because child endangerment laws and their judicial interpretation are different in each state, healthcare providers should familiarize themselves with the law in their particular jurisdiction. In situations in which parents refuse on religious grounds to consent to medical treatment for their children, health care providers should consult local counsel as to the legal options available.     

失地农民社会权保障的宪法分析

社会权作为失地农民的一项基本权利,由于制度性根源、法律根源和公共政策根源造成了失地农民社会权的贫困,并且未得到宪法等法律的有效保护。从构建和谐社会角度看,加强失地农民社会权的宪法保障,以人为本是失地农民社会权宪法保障的哲学伦理学基础,阶层平等是失地农民社会权宪法保障的法理基础,人格尊严与个人自治是失地农民社会权宪法保障的人权法价值。失地农民社会权的宪法保障离不开宪法本身的完善和宪政制度构建的支持,实现失地农民社会权宪法保障是国家应尽的义务。     

General practitioners' competence and confidentiality determinations with a minor who requests the oral contraceptive pill

The right of minors to make medical treatment decisions is an issue that is not explicitly addressed in the legislation of most Australian jurisdictions. While recent common law decisions allow competent minors to consent to treatment, current legislation in Victoria does not provide adequate guidelines on how competence is to be measured. It is also unclear whether the duty of confidentiality is extended to competent minors. The current study explored general practitioners' competence and confidentiality decisions with a hypothetical 14-year-old patient who requests the oral contraceptive pill (OCP). Questionnaires were sent to 1,000 Victorian general practitioners, 305 of whom responded. General practitioners were asked to determine whether "Liz" was competent to request the OCP, and whether they would maintain her confidentiality. A total of 81% of respondents found the patient competent, while 91% would have maintained her confidentiality. Results indicate that the majority of general practitioners used rationales that generally did not conform to current legal principles when making competence and confidentiality determinations regarding this patient.     

行政法上的客观法与主观法

针对如何理解行政法上客观法与主观法的关系,存在三种基本立场。主客观法分离立场认为维护公益的行政法与公民个人权利形成对峙。该立场存在无法关联违法性与侵权性、抱持无视宪法的行政法观等疑问。主客观法结合立场主张从客观法中分出一部分请求权对应行政主体法定义务。该立场存在宪法与行政法平台错位、公益与私益纵向割裂等局限。主客观法统一立场将客观法当作主观法的全部集合,权利由客观法分解得来。该立场是理解行政法主客观法关系的妥当见解。在分配行政与利害调整观念下,特定或不特定复数私人主体间基于行政法律规范的各种利益与不利益冲突、对立并交织而成的利害关系网才是行政实体法律关系的本质,行政法上的实体权利应当由此导出。遵循“利害关系→合法权益”而非“合法权益→利害关系”的逻辑顺序才是判断行政诉讼原告资格的正确方法。     

由谁来行使知情同意的权利:患者还是家属?

知情同意权是患者的一项基本权利,但是在我国目前的医疗实务中,该项权利却普遍地由患者的家属予以行使。本文围绕应当由谁来行使“有同意能力的患者”的知情同意权这一问题,由现行法的态度出发,从正反两个角度论证了应当由患者本人行使其知情同意权的观点。     

竞争法对知识产权的保护与限制

知识产权法对知识所建构的权利义务规范以及民法基本原则对知识产权的保护和限制存在着天然的缺陷。知识的私有性与社会性,决定了知识产权与反不正当竞争法和反垄断法的被保护与被规制的关系。反不正当竞争法着眼于侵权人,保护知识产权不受侵犯;反垄断法着眼于权利人,以便防范知识产权的滥用。二者弥补了私法层面对知识产权保护的不足和对滥用知识产权行为制约的局限。     

从国际法角度看受教育权的权利性质

国际人权法主要文书的内容和精神都表明受教育权是一项基本人权而不附带任何义务,战后各国的国内法的修改也表现出接受这种精神的趋向。保障公民的受教育权要求国家承担起相应的义务。我国要顺应国际人权法发展的要求,在条件成熟时对宪法的相关条款进行修改,删除公民有受教育的义务的提法。     

我国高等教育管理法律规范体系的内容及完善

我国高等教育管理法律规范体系主要指《中华人民共和国教育法》、《中华人民共和国高等教育法》等法律法规中调整高校与学生之间关系所涉及的高校的法律地位、高校的主要权利和义务、学生的主要权利和义务、学生权利的救济等方面内容的法律规范的总和。本文通过解读并分析其主要内容,探讨了我国高等教育管理法律规范体系在内容和形式方面的立法缺陷,提出了相应的完善对策,以期有利于保障高校依法治校。     

浅议《侵权责任法》生效后如何履行预防接种告知义务

我国法律规定医务人员具有预防接种法定告知义务,以保护受种者的知情同意权和自主选择权。2010年7月1日起生效的《侵权责任法》对该法定义务做出了更为明确和丰富的要求,其中规定了替代医疗方案的告知义。因此,预防接种过程中医务人员应将疫苗的品种等向受种者方予以全面告知。     

试论我国民法典体系

体系化与系统化是民法典的内在要求。仅适用个别的局部性的民事关系的 ,或常会发生改变的 ,或处于公法与私法交叉地带的 ,或具有很强的技术性的程序性规定 ,均应由单行法加以规定。我国民法典体系要采纳德国潘德克顿模式 ,应以法律关系的要素来构建总则 ,以法律关系的内容即民事权利来展开分则。分则应为人格权、亲属法、继承法、物权、债权总则、合同法的一般规定 ;在分则关于民事权利的各编之后 ,应规定一个对各类民事权利加以保护的侵权责任编。     

试论高校法治管理中权利义务不对等问题

高校法治管理的基本问题是教师、干部、学生的权利义务关系问题,这是高校法治管理的过程中不能回避的问题;权利义务的对等性是高校法治管理的基本原则,要实行有效的高校法治管理必须遵循这一基本原则;高校法治管理中教师、干部、学生的权利义务不对等有多种表现和复杂原因;在高校法治管理过程中,贯彻落实权利义务对等性原则,必须坚决克服官本位和等级特权思想,牢固树立以人为本的观念,同时,还要在组织、制度、措施上加以保障。     

法权意义上的生态人格

法权意义上的生态人格是指环境法上的权利和义务所归属的主体所具有的维护环境权益的尊严、价值取向和品格。这种人格的取向体现了对环境法的价值认同与对环境权的尊重;这种人格的确立不仅是我国环境保护法治社会形成的基础,更是实现公民个人全面自由发展的前提;这种人格的培育必须通过实行政府生态责任运行机制,不断完善环境立法,制定完善环境经济政策,推动绿色司法,加强环境法律教育,培养生态保护法律意识等路径来塑造。     

论著作人格权保护在美国的演绎

著作人格权作为一种非财产性权利,是作者享有的基于作品产生的人格利益.著作人格权制度是版权体系和作者权体系的分水岭所在.现行美国《版权法》第106条之2保护“某些作者的署名权及其保护作品完整权”,可是美国真的保护著作人格权吗？最初,美国延续版权体系的传统,无论是在版权法案中还是在司法实践中都不保护著作人格权制度.直到1988年,美国加入《伯尔尼公约》后,为了履行公约义务不得不在其版权法案中加入著作人格权的保护条款,但在司法实践中,美国仍遵循版权是财产权的理念,通过对作者和作品范围严格限定并未真正保护著作人格权.