中华人民共和国价格法

第二章 经营者的价格行为 第六条 商品价格和服务价格,除依照本法第十八条规定适用政府指导价或者政府定价外,实行市场调节价,由经营者依照本法自主制定。 第七条 经营者定价,应当遵循公平、合法和诚实信用的原则。 第八条 经营者定价的基本依据是生产经营成本     

电价上涨该谁埋单

近日，国务院常务会议决定，近期油价、电价以及城市公共交通等公用事业不得加价。自1993年起实行价格干预措施以来，这或许还是15年来政府第一次用行政手段直接控制市场商品价格，折射出政府对于未来价格上涨的压力和担忧。2007年，围绕电价，电力巨头曾跟国家发改委、煤炭企业进行了几轮讨价还价，但最终电力价格依旧未涨。但从长远看，电力等能源价格走势都是向上的，     

长虹彩电降价引出的法律之争──降价促销与低价倾销经济法津辨析

一、价格竞争的法律依据和经济准则 我国先后于１９９３年和１９９７年制定并实施了《反不正当竞争法》和《价格法》，迄今为止，这两部法律是规范价格竞争领域的基本法，也是界定合法的降价促销和非法的低价倾销的法律依据。根据上述法律规定的精神，除与国民经济发展和人民生活关系重大的极少数商品价格、自然垄断经营的商品价格、资源稀缺的少数商品价格、重要的公用事业价格、重要的公益性服务价格适用政府指导价或者政府定价并依中央和地方人民政府公布的定价目录为依据外，绝大多数的商品价格和服务价格，实行市场调节价，由从事生产…     

我国专利侵权损害赔偿额计算方法适用论要

我国专利侵权损害赔偿额计算方法的规定经过了一个变化发展的过程,《专利法》第65条规定了四种损害赔偿额的计算方法。实际损失的确定可采取权利产品销量下降计算法、成本增加计算法、价格腐蚀计算法,侵权所得以侵权产品在市场上销售的总数与每件侵权产品的营业利润或者销售利润之积得出,许可使用费可按固定许可费确定法、惯例确定法、虚拟自愿协商法、分析法计算,适用法定赔偿时应考虑多种因素。     

知假买假行为适用惩罚性赔偿的思考——基于法经济学和法社会学的视角

《消法》第49条规定的惩罚性赔偿制度的功能并不仅在于对受害者的赔偿和致害者的惩罚,而更多地在于通过有效减少不良行为者的利益促使其良性行为,从而维护市场的有序,但这有赖于消费者成功的维权行为,而消费者维权行为的缺乏使这一制度的打假功能无法实现。虽然公力执法与私力执法各有其专有领域,但他们之间的界线并非绝对、恒定。政府的能力大小、公益性程度、执法效率的高低及私力执法的成本与收益等因素决定了这条界线的偏离方向及程度。如果私力执行的成本更低,激励更大,效率更高,负面影响不大,而若公力执行的效率下高,则应该考虑私力路径的采用。综合考虑我国目前政府打假能力及公益性程度、假冒伪劣产品的泛滥程度、市场主体诚信行为的比例、消费者受欺诈的严重程度等因素以及可能的变化方向及程度,在我国目前赋予知假买假者获得惩罚性赔偿的权利以发挥其打假功能是必要的。     

政府立法中处理公平与效率的关系的基本原则

公平与效率是法律的重要价值。二者是相互作用、相互促进,又是相互矛盾、相互制约的。政府立法需要正确处理公平与效率的关系进而体现公平与效率这两个法律的基本价值目标。市场领域的政府立法应当遵循“效率优先,兼顾公平”的原则,非市场领域的政府立法应当遵循“公平优先,兼顾效率”的原则。     

当前市场价格欺诈和暴利现象的调查与思考

市场价格放开之后,确实给一度沉闷萧条的商品市场带来了一派繁荣景象,但也随之滋生了一系列的恶疾:市场价格欺诈和非法牟取暴利等。消费者称之为“市场母夜叉”、“市场艾滋病”,对其深恶痛绝之。     

揭示数码产品买卖中的三大法律陷阱

近年来，随着物质生活水平的迅速提高和消费理念的转变，数码产品已经成为消费者的新宠。出于节约购买成本的考虑，更多的消费者选择从零售商处直接购买此类产品。无形中也增加了购物消费的风险。为了帮助购买数码产品的消费者。明确如何在获得商品实惠价格的同时从法律的层面防范商业欺诈，法官在此通过几个具体案例为消费者揭示数码产品销售的三大常见法律陷阱及相应对策。     

侵犯知识产权罪的数额认定

本文案例启示:侵犯知识产权罪中的"非法经营数额"在库存商品标价或可以查清侵权商品的实际销售平均价格时,依侵权产品的价格计算;如果无法查清,依真品的市场价格计算。"销售金额"包括已经实际获得的价款,也包括商品售出后将要获得的价款。"违法所得数额"是在销售金额中除去成本后所得的纯利润。"直接经济损失"     

统筹城乡社会保障制度构建中政府责任定位的思考

社会保障作为促进经济发展和保持社会稳定的基本制度,是一项十分复杂的系统工程。国际经验表明,构建社会保障制度的焦点在于政府责任与定位,即处理好政府与市场的关系,协调好公平与效率的矛盾。我国社会保障发展的现实矛盾和进一步发展的要求是构建统筹城乡的社会保障制度。对此,政府应明确责任范围,切实承担和履行责任。     

集资诈骗罪“非法占有目的”要件的理论修正与司法检视

传统非法占有目的理论难以对集资诈骗罪中反复的"借款-还款"行为予以精准定性。"排除意思"既不是诈骗罪主观层面的要素,也无法适用于持续还本付息的集资诈骗行为。"利用意思"和"不法获利"不能用以区分集资诈骗罪与非法吸收公众存款罪,无法发挥"非法占有目的"应有的罪名界分功能。非法占有目的并非集资诈骗罪的独立构成要件,以集资诈骗故意统摄本罪的主观要件并规范化解释为财产损害故意,能够完整地发挥定罪和罪名区分功能。以不具有债务履行能力和意愿推定财产损害故意,不仅符合理论逻辑,也能够通过司法实践的检验。     

举证时限制度的冷思考

在价值目标上,举证时限制度不仅偏离实体公正,而且不可能真正提高诉讼效率,同时也不能真正体现和实现程序正义。大陆法系国家几乎找不到类似中国举证时限的立法体例,英美法系国家有举证时限,但其是以陪审制和漫长、充分的证据开示为依托的,且设立举证时限、证据开示的真正目的不是在于提高效率,而是发现真实,破除“竞技论”的弊端。如果说我国的举证时限制度是属于外国制度的大胆引入,那么,忽视了其制度背景和功能实质的移植是难以达到立法目的的。     

Gauging the Strength of Evidence Prior to Plea Bargaining: The Interpretive Procedures of Court-Appointed Defense Attorneys

An important debate among court observers is whether plea bargaining undermines the ideals of justice. This article presents findings that may rec-oncile some inconsistent research conclusions. It describes how, prior to plea bargaining, one group of court-appointed defense attorneys gauges the strength of evidence through a tacit, taken-for-granted process that emulates trial proceedings: based on their understanding of evidence in the legal com-munity, defenders imagine a courtroom dialogue wherein the prosecution and defense take turns presenting their cases in front of a judge and jury. At issue throughout the dialogue is whether or to what extent information is suffi-dent, legal, and persuasive enough to convict the defendant. Because the process is part of the defenders' ongoing and unspoken daily routines, it may elude unsuspecting investigators. Ironically, this means not only that some analysts may inappropriately conclude that legal ideals play no role in plea bargaining but also that others may ingenuously assume that such behavior is more ethical than it actually is.     

Tax Fraud and Selective Law Enforcement

This article presents a new conceptual framework for research into tax fraud and law enforcement. Informed by research approaches from across tax law, public economics, criminology, criminal justice, economics of crime, and regulatory theory, it assesses the effectiveness, and the legitimacy, of current approaches to combating tax fraud, bringing new dimensions to previously identified trends in crime control. It argues that, whilst the last decade has witnessed a significant intensification of measures that purportedly target tax fraud, preference has been consistently given to enforcement measures that maximize revenue gains rather than combat the fraud itself, even where the effect is to aggravate the non-revenue costs of tax fraud. These developments demonstrate a significant shift from tax fraud suppression to tax fraud management. The article concludes that this shift not only undermines tax equity and overall tax compliance, but also leads to selective tax enforcement, thus representing a significant risk to the rule of law.     

Capacity as Philosophy: A Review of Richard Lippke’s, The Ethics of Plea Bargaining

Plea bargaining is a response to capacity overload in the criminal justice system. It both preserves and belies the right to trial, making possible its glorious display but only by denying it in most cases. While plea bargaining has been documented and analysed copiously in historical, sociological and legal terms, its ethical status as an institutional practice are hazy. Richard Lippke offers an account of plea bargaining that draws on the normative debates over responsibility, culpability and desert, in aid of a holistic proposal for a morally defensible system of pre-trial adjudication. In proposing an ethical system of plea bargaining, and working through the normative challenges to this, two bigger questions become visible. These are: what are the implications of developing, in essence, an ethics of efficiency, and, how should the criminal justice system be held to account for the inequalities (and iniquities) that exist before and outside it? In this review essay, I show how these questions are constructed in the book and make some attempt at analysing them, thus engaging with the more urgent and general issue of the complicated relationship of the ideal to the real when it comes to penal practice.     

Justice at the confluence of law and economics

Law has long been combined with economic thought, but only recently has law been combined with economic theory. This article explores the implications of this development for theories of justice and interdisciplinary research. Value in economics is usually measured by price (the market tradition) or by satisfaction (the utilitarian tradition). The relationship of these concepts to equity in law is explored. Also explored is the relationship between bargaining theory and contractarian theories of justice. The article examines the possibility that methods and concepts developed in the economic analysis of law will prove useful to sociologists and social psychologists by contrasting the study of rational choice and the study of attitudes.     

英国法庭科学服务部的市场化变迁及其启示

英国法庭科学服务部市场化发展历史体现出竞争性市场有利于提升效率和为买方节约成本，这说明纯公益性刑事司法服务的某些法庭科学服务项目是可以市场化的；但其最终因超高的营运成本被迫关闭也说明商品化的服务市场承载不了法庭科学全面发展所需要的科学性要求。英国采用价格竞争的方式将法庭科学服务市场化，相比之下，真正的竞争性在中国当前的司法鉴定制度下却不存在，对司法鉴定制度进行改革已经刻不容缓。     

Why should disclosure rules subsidize informed traders?

This article justifies the existence of disclosure provisions as part of the securities laws. Securities prices may deviate from the securities' underlying values due to “irrationalities.” Market efficiency (i.e., the accuracy of securities' prices) materializes through the trading of investors who observe and attempt to profit from these inefficiencies. The danger of false prices deters the corrective trading of these “informed traders”. This article argues that disclosure rules provide them with costless information, essentially subsidizing their activity. The cost of this subsidy is borne by the corporation, i.e., all shareholders, of which informed traders are only a fraction. Long-term shareholders would not subsidize efficiency absent disclosure rules because, they do not trade, and they do not reap the benefits of accurate prices. This subsidy fosters short-term uninformed shareholdings and, thus, increases trading volume and capital market liquidity.     

Political Liberalism, Ethos Justice, and Gender Equality

Susan Okin criticizes John Rawls’s ‘political liberalism’ because it does not apply principles of justice directly to gender relations within households. We explain how one can be a ‘political liberal feminist’ by distinguishing between two kinds of justice: the first we call ‘legitimacy justice’, conceptions of which apply to the ‘legally coercive structure’ of society; the second we call ‘ethos justice’, conceptions of which apply to citizens’ ‘non-coercive’ relations. We agree with Okin that a society in which most persons act in accordance with ‘gender equal’ ethos justice is morally superior to one in which most persons do not. A shared commitment to a particular conception of ethos justice, however, cannot be required by a conception of legitimacy justice. A political liberal feminist is committed to promoting gender equality with respect to both legitimacy justice and ethos justice, but recognizes that different means are necessary to do so.