THE FAMILY LAW EDUCATION REFORM PROJECT FINAL REPORT

The Family Law Education Reform Project (the FLER Project) is co‐sponsored by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts and the Center for Children, Families and the Law at Hofstra Law School. This Final Report is based on a series of dialogues between family law academics and practitioners from many disciplines, a FLER Project survey, and research conducted by law students at Hofstra University and Northeastern University. 2     

THE POTENTIAL OF THE FAMILY LAW EDUCATION REFORM PROJECT FOR FAMILY LAWYERS1

Family lawyers are major beneficiaries of the reforms set out in the Family Law Education Reform Project (FLER) Report. This commentary from a veteran family law practitioner explores the needs of the family law bar for the training of law students in practical, interdisciplinary, client‐centered lawyering that goes beyond the traditional case method. I trace many of the current innovations evolving in family law practice and how FLER reforms will not only benefit law schools but also have a major impact in the courts and private practice sector.     

FAMILY LAW EDUCATION REFORM PROJECT: A FACULTY PERSPECTIVE

The Family Law Education Reform Project Report calls for shifting the family law teaching paradigm from a focus on case‐based analysis toward a problem‐solving, interdisciplinary approach. This essay encourages law professors to take seriously this shifting teaching and learning paradigm. Aligning family law curriculum with the realities of practicing family law is a critical step in this process. This essay discusses the numerous intellectual challenges family law professors will face as they reflect on the proposed FLER Project curriculum.     

HOFSTRA'S FAMILY LAW WITH SKILLS COURSE: IMPLEMENTING FLER (THE FAMILY LAW EDUCATION REFORM PROJECT)

The Family Law Education Reform Project (FLER) Final Report documented that the current doctrinally oriented family law curriculum at most law schools does not adequately prepare students for modern family law practice. FLER recommended that law school courses move from the study of cases to the study of the legal system's effect on families, and integrate the study of alternative dispute resolution and interdisciplinary knowledge. In response, Hofstra Law School has made a comprehensive attempt to implement FLER's curricular recommendations. This article discusses one major innovation – the Family Law with Skills course. Family Law with Skills is the basic course in Hofstra's revised curriculum and is designed to integrate doctrinal teaching with professional skills development. In addition to studying legal doctrine, students are required to engage in structured field observation of family court proceedings; interviewing, counseling, negotiation, and mediation representation exercises in a divorce dispute; direct and cross examination of a social worker in a child protection dispute; and drafting of a surrogacy agreement. The article describes each exercise and discusses its rationale, student reaction to the course, and lessons learned.     

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: WHY WE DO WHAT WE DO—A FAMILY COURT REFLECTION

This article, adapted from the keynote address delivered at the Hofstra University School of Law Family Law Review Annual Banquet on March 24, 2011, focuses on the impact of the Family Law Review, the need to improve the stature of the family court, and shares excepts of letters written by members of the New York State Permanent Judicial Commission on Justice for Children regarding their passion for working in the fields of child welfare and in the family court.     

LAW SCHOOLS AND FAMILY COURT REFORM

Family courts are underfunded and overwhelmed, and the quality of representation provided by counsel in family court cases is problematic. This article discusses what role law schools can play in promoting family court reform. It argues that law school involvement in family court is consistent with the law school's core missions of education, research, and public service. The article illustrates how law schools can be involved in family court reform by discussing interdisciplinary projects of the Center for Children, Families and the Law of Hofstra University and North Shore–Long Island Jewish Health Systems. Finally, the article identifies some lessons to be learned if law schools want to be involved in family court reform.     

沦"儿童最大利益优先原则"在中国的确立——兼论《婚姻法》等相关法律的不足及其完善

International documents like the Declaration of the Rights of the Child (1959) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) propose that in mediating on children issues, the best interests of the child should be the primary consideration. In China, the Constitution and the Law on the Protection of Minors have already set out the terms in principle for the protection of minors, however, it has not been defined in the Marriage Law (2001). In order to enforce the commitment of respecting and safeguarding human rights, the child’s best interest principle should be established in marriage and family law, along with amending related provisions. Chen Wei is a professor of law, and director of the Research Center for Foreign Family Law and Women Theories in the China Southwest University of Political Science and Law. She is in the teachings of civil law, family law, law of succession, the history of civil law and comparative family law for years. During 2003–2004, Prof. Chen, being a visiting scholar, studied foreign family laws in the Faculty of Law, Sydney University. In academic field, she has published over 50 research articles in China and abroad; and her monograph is Research on the Legislations of Marriage and Family Law of China (2000). Further, she has taken charge of editing over 10 books, for instance, A Comparative Study of Family Laws between the Mainland and Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan of China (2002), A Comparative Study of Foreign Marriage and Family Law (2006) and A Comparative Study of Succession Laws among the Mainland, Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan of China (2007).     

DETERMINING THE EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION OF A CHILD IN OUR LEGAL SYSTEM

This note addresses the process by which lawyers must determine their role and responsibilities with regard to a child-client. The authors engage in an analysis of current standards, such as AAML, ABA, Fordham Conference. and Jean Koh Peters, by employing a case study.which was modeled after an actual case that was being handled by the Hofstra University School of Law Child Advocacy Clinic. The case study is then applied to the four current standards and to the ethical standards proposed by The Model Rules of Professional Conduct and the Quebec Bar Association's findings.     

Cave Jurisdictionem – Recent Cases on Family Law and Conflicts in Australia

This article examines some recent decisions of the Family Court of Australia as they relate to matters of private international law in family law matters. Although the notion of forum non conveniens is considered, a major focus remains on the approach of the jurisdiction to the Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. In the various issues which have appeared before it, the Family Court of Australia has demonstrated a degree of confusion which suggests that other jurisdictions should be cautious in their dealings with Australia in the areas which the article discusses.Professor of Law, University of Newcastle (NSW).     

ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS WHITE PAPER GUIDELINES FOR COURT‐INVOLVED THERAPY: A BEST PRACTICE APPROACH FOR MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS

This article was written by the Honorable Linda S. Fidnick and Kelly. A. Koch, Esq. Judge Fidnick is an Associate Justice with the Hampshire Probate and Family Court. Prior to her appointment to the bench in 2008, Judge Fidnick was a partner in the Amherst law firm of Burres, Fidnick & Booth LLP, where she concentrated her practice in all areas of family law. Judge Fidnick is a graduate of Smith College and the University of Connecticut Law School, and she has been a member of the Massachusetts Bar for over thirty years. Judge Fidnick is past president of the Massachusetts chapter of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) and currently serves on the national board of directors of AFCC. Judge Fidnick and Matthew Sullivan, Ph.D. are the co‐chairs of the AFCC Task Force on Court‐Involved Therapists. Attorney Koch is a graduate of Brandeis University and WesternNew England College School of Law. She served as a law clerk to the Justices of the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court and is presently an associate attorney with the Springfield, Massachusetts firm of Bulkley, Richardson and Gelinas. Matthew J. Sullivan, Ph.D. is a psychologist in private practice in California who has written articles, presented and done trainings at numerous national and international venues on interventions in high conflict divorce, Parenting Coordination and child alienation in family law cases. He currently serves on the Board of Directors at AFCC. Lyn R. Greenberg, Ph.D. is a family forensic psychologist practicing in Los Angeles, California. She serves as the reporter for the AFCC Court‐Involved Therapist Task Force and Co‐Chairs the Family Forensic Special Interest Group of Div. 43. She Co‐Chaired the APA‐ABA Working Group on Representation and Advocacy for Children. The AFCC Task Force on Court‐Involved Therapists was given the charge of defining guidelines for the professional practice of therapists working with court‐involved families. A draft of the Guidelines was presented for Comments in March 2010 and all comments were submitted to the Task Force Reporter, Lyn R. Greenberg, Ph.D. on May 1, 2010.     

对中国登记离婚制度的评价与反思

The Regulations on Marriage Registration promulgated in 2003 advocates the ideas for autonomy of private law, such as “autonomy of individual will”, “self responsibility” and “self-determination right”, ushering a new era of Chinese divorce registration system from supervision by employed institution to self responsibility, however, such issues also result in excessive freedom and insufficient restriction. In setting up the divorce registration system, therefore, it shall also be considered for the protection of disadvantaged parties and minor children so as to ensure the fairness and justice of law and the harmony and stability of society. Xia Yinlan, LL.D, is a professor and doctoral tutor and the dean of the School of International Studies in China University of Political Science and Law. She is also the vice chairman of Beijing Women’s Federation, the member of the executive committee of China Women’s Federation, the director of Marriage and Family Legal Research Institution under the supervision of China Law Society, the vice director of China Association of Marriage and Family Studies, the standing director of the International Family Law Society, the vice director of Beijing Women’s Law Research Institution. Her major academic interest covers women’s human rights, heritage law and family law. She was once a Fulbright visiting scholar in the United States and a legal expert in Macau Legal Affair Bureau. She’s one of the experts in drafting the P.R.C. Law on the Protection Of Women’s Rights (revised), the Marriage Law of P.R.C. (revised) and the Regulation of Marriage Registration of P.R.C., and she is still active in participating in the legislation activities of China. Prof. Xia wrote or co-wrote more than 20 monographs and textbooks, including American Modern Family and Marriage System, the Freedom and Restriction of Divorce, the Basic Framework Research on Domestic Violence Law, etc. In Chinese and foreign academic journals, more than 60 articles have been released, such as the study on property segmentation in divorce in China, the study on family violence under the framework of women’s rights, the comparison on the factual marriage in Macau and the Mainland of China.     

NO MORE CASEBOOKS: USING SIMULATION‐BASED LEARNING TO EDUCATE FUTURE FAMILY LAW PRACTITIONERS

Teaching family law using the traditional casebook method provides students with marginal knowledge and skills. To practice family law, one needs to know how to interview and counsel clients, negotiate with opposing counsel, file pleadings and supporting documents, draft agreements, and understand tax consequences. Moreover, ethical issues abound in the practice of family law, such as confidentiality, conflict of interest, and fee arrangements. Critics of traditional pedagogies in legal academia have included the MacCrate Report, the Carnegie Report, and Best Practices for Legal Education. The Family Law Education Reform Project has focused its attention on the failure of law schools to keep pace with the ever‐evolving nature and requirements of family law practice. This article offers one answer to those who seek to educate law students in a manner that will better prepare them for the practice of family law. The author, who is the director of Vermont Law School's General Practice Program, describes a family law course she has developed and taught for many years. The course is taught in an integrative fashion, and includes substantive law, practice skills, and ethical and professionalism issues. She offers the course as a response and antidote to the ongoing criticisms of tradition a methods of teaching law.     

《内地与香港关于建立更紧密经贸关系的安排》的法律地位

The nature of the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA) is a free trade agreement under the framework of the WTO. For the purpose of clarifying the legal status of the CEPA and the future agreements between the Mainland and other separate customs territories of China, four options are brought forward: (1) To revise the PRC Foreign Trade Law, (2) to make amendment to the Basic Law of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China, (3) to have a special law on the conclusion of the interregional agreements, or (4) to amend the PRC Constitution. Wang Wei, Ph.D, is an associate professor at School of Law, Fudan University, China. Before, he was a research fellow at the Faculty of Law, University of Hong Kong. He holds an LL.B. from the East China University of Political Science and Law, an LL.M. from Fudan University in international law, an LL.M. from Southern Methodist University in comparative and international law (Sohmen Scholar), a Ph.D from the University of London in law (the John and Joan Jackson Scholar). Dr. Wang wrote a number of articles on WTO law, financial law and commercial law, such as Historical Evolution of National Treatment in China (39 International Lawyer 759–779, Fall Issue, 2005). He has spoken and chaired conferences and seminars in London, Hong Kong and Mainland of China. Recently he acts as consultant in banking law projects, including the Asian Development Bank.     

《中华人民共和国反垄断法》析评

The Anti-Monopoly Law of the People’s Republic of China has provided to prohibit monopoly agreements and abuse of dominant market position, control concentration of business operators and fight against administrative monopoly. The transformation of China’s economic system is incomplete, and the Anti-Monopoly Law has many flaws. At the initial stage of enforcing the Anti-Monopoly Law, severe challenges will occur in legislative purposes, enforcement authorities, fighting against administrative monopoly and handling of the relationship between anti-monopoly enforcement and industry supervision. Thus, the promulgation of the Anti-Monopoly Law is only the first step in the legislation on anti-monopoly. Wang Xiaoye held a bachelor’s degree of philosophy from Inner Mongolian Normal University (1981), LL.M. from Renmin University of China (1984) and Doctor Juris magna cum laude from the University Hamburg (1993). Since 1984, she works at the Institute of Law, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS). From 1988 to 1993, she studied in Germany based on Max-Planck Institute for Comparative Private Law. As visiting scholar she spent a year at Max-Planck Institute for Comparative Intellectual Property and Competition Law, and a year at Max-Planck Institute for Comparative Social Law in Munich. In 2004, she was invited to the US by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice. In 2005, she was invited to the European Union Visitors Program, and awarded a Fulbright Scholarship to spend a year at the Chicago-Kent College of Law. Prof. Wang works in the areas of economic law, international economic law, and focuses on competition law. Her publications include: Monopoly and Competition in the Chinese Economy — A conception for merger control in China in view of the American and German practices (J C B Mohr, 1993); Monopoly Problem in the Merger of Enterprises (Law Press, 1996); On Competition Law (China’s Legal Publishing House, 1999); Competition Law of European Community (China’s Legal Publishing House, 2001); Economic Law (Social Sciences Academic Press, 2005); Competition Law (Social Sciences Academic Press, 2007). She also has over 200 papers published in Chinese, German and English languages. Prof. Wang has served as vice president of National Association for Economic Law of China, the head of the Consultant Committee for WTO Trade and Competition Policy of the Ministry of Commerce, and member of the Expert Advisory Board for Anti-Monopoly Legislation of the State Council and the National People’s Congress. In her honor, she once lectured on competition law for the Standing Committee of the Ninth and Tenth People’s Congress. In international academic activities, she is a founding member of Academic Society for Competition Law (ASCOLA) and of the Asian Competition Forum, and member of International Advisory Board of the CUTS C-CIER. She lectured on Chinese law at ABA, IBA, IPBA, ACF, Harvard University, Columbia University, Washington University (St. Louis), New York University, KFTC, Chatham House, LIDC, IDRC and other institutions.     

高管薪酬规范与法律的有限干预

The determination of corporate executive compensation is a kind of affiliated transactions including special conflicts of interest in the company. The regulation of executive compensation by law is extremely necessary but plays a limited role, and the scope and mode of such role are specific. The due process and information disclosure system in determining executive compensation prescribed in company law and securities law, the policy guidance of the tax legal regime, and the active and prudential judicial review are the three aspects of the regulation of executive compensation by law, the common goal of which is to ensure and enhance the correlation between executive compensation and corporate performance, i.e., the realization of the principle of “performance-based compensation.” Li Jianwei, Ph. D, is an associate professor of law at China University of Political Science and Law, and a visiting scholar at Faculty of Law, University of New South Wales, Australia. His major research is in corporate law, corporate governance and corporate management system, and his major works include: Corporate Law (RUC Press, 2008), Legal Regulation on Affiliated Transaction (Law Press, 2007), The Role of Law in Corporate Management (People’s Court Press, 2005), A Research on Independent Director System (RUC Press, 2004), A Research on the State-owned Exclusive Company (Law Press, 2002). Moreover, he has more than 30 articles released in core academic journals.     

Review on the inefficiency and disorganization of judicial power

The reform of civil procedure has been taken as an important topic by both scholars and judges in the recent twenty years. Cases and judges’ practices offer materials and opportunities for scholars to carry out researches, which help judges find the direction of the reform on civil procedures. However, it is not advisable to reconstruct the absolute adversary system and pure due process in China to reduce the great power of the court. Therefore, it is essential to review on the basic theory of civil procedure and overcome the inefficiency and disorganization of the judicial power by regulating judges’ power and independence as well as their responsibilities. Xiao Jianhua, professor and doctoral tutor of China University of Politics and Law. He got a master degree in Southwest University of Politics and Law in 1995 and a doctor degree in China University of Politics and Law in 1998. He had been a Fulbright Visiting Scholar studying at Law School of Northwestern (USA) in 2003–2004. His research field covers civil procedural law and evidence law. His six books on civil procedural law and evidence law are published in China, his another book on bankruptcy will be published in England. Now his research is focused on comparative law.     

父親的正義感，照我一生

中國政法大學潘漢典教授是《元照英美法詞典》的總審訂人，也是《君主論》、《比較法總論》等多部名著的漢鋒者.通擅英、法、日、德、俄等多種語言。潘先生今已89歲高齡，他早年從東吴大學法學院獲得碩士學位，先後在北京大學、中國社會科學院法學研究所、中國政法大學問學論道，終身與法結绎. 本刊約請潘先生憶往，温故知新。法學舊事，亦豐厚，亦温文。     

EMPOWERMENT,INNOVATION, AND SERVICE: LAW SCHOOL PROGRAMS PROVIDE ACCESS TO JUSTICE AND INSTILL A COMMITMENT TO SERVE

Law schools around the country seek to fill the legal needs of their communities in ways that are both innovative and mutually beneficial to clients and students. This article describes five pro bono and clinical programs, at the University of Richmond School of Law, The Earle Mack School of Law at Drexel University, Catholic University Columbus School of Law, the Thomas Jefferson School of Law, and Vermont Law School, where law students, under the supervision of law professors or community professionals, provide assistance or legal representation to underserved and often marginalized populations needing help with family law problems, including parents accused of abuse and neglect, youth aging out of foster care, homeless families, survivors of domestic violence, homeless veterans with addiction problems, and female prisoners. To develop their programs, the five law schools from the outset collaborated with partners in the community, and they continue to do so as their programs expand and evolve. In addition to helping and empowering clients, these law schools are providing experiential learning opportunities that are transformative for their students. The authors hope that these programs will be instructive for law schools, other academic institutions, the legal community, and community organizations in developing creative collaborations to ensure better access to justice.     

THE OVERVIEW ON THE UK-CHINA CONFERENCE ON PUBLIC LAW

Renmin University of China hosted the first ＂＇UK-China Conference on Public Law＂ on 2-6 September, 2013. The conference was a collaboration between Renmin University of China, Oxford University, University College of London （UCL）, China Association of Constitutional Law, and the United Kingdom Constitutional Law Group. The conference was eo-organised by Nick Barber from Oxford University, Jeff King from UCL, Han Dayuan from Renmin University and Li Ruiyi from Nankai University. It was partly sponsored by multinational law firm Clifford Chance. More than 50 Chinese and British academics participated. A range of topics was covered including the position of soft law and conventions in constitutions, constitutional structure, the rule of law, judicial independence, protection of human rights, interaction between welfare states and the rule of law, and the role of the court and the judge in regulating administration. Chinese and UK academics of public law actively participated in discussions. The conference marked an unprecedented communication and exchange on constitutionalism between Chinese and British scholars.     

各国立法上违约金性质比较研究

违约金诞生于罗马法,至今理论界仍存在很大分歧,这集中表现在两大法系对惩罚性违约金的态度上。我国合同法第114条对违约金性质做了专门规定,但在理论上依然有一些问题引发争论。如何吸收两大法系的经验,及时完善我国违约金制度,避免国际贸易中的合同条款因违背各国的国内强行法而无效,实有必要对各国违约金的性质进行比较研究。