法律与道德：正义的法哲学及其发展——以瑞特纳帕拉法学思想研究为核心

正义的概念和范畴,在持不同理论立场的思想家眼中呈现出不同的样态,引发了人们对正义是否是一个值得法理学研究的对象这一问题的深刻思考。瑞特纳帕拉(Suri Ratnapala)通过对法律是什么、为何以及如何遵守法律的法哲学演进的梳理和追问,独创性地区分"依法的正义"和"法律的正义"两种概念,对于法律与道德以及正义的法哲学内核做出了当代诠释和发展。所谓"依法的正义",是指法律是实现正义的手段和工具;"法律的正义",则指特定法律的正义性或道德正当性。但是,只有个体间认知的耦合,才会导致关于正义行为的道德规则的汇聚和产生,因而正义的实现其实就是对以人类经验积累的方式得以建立的基本行为规范的遵守。不同正义理论的建构,旨在使我们共同走向一个美好的理想——运用法律手段建构一种适于人类生活和自由全面发展的社会秩序。     

Welfare and Freedom: Towards a Semi-Kantian Theory of Private Law

The Kantian theory of private law, as Ernest Weinrib and Arthur Ripstein have developed it over the last two decades, is based on a fundamental normative truth, viz., no person is subordinate or superior to another person. Kantians construe any attempt to understand and justify the distribution of the rights-claims and rights-liberties that constitute private law in terms of aggregate welfare and/or distributive justice, as a deep category mistake. This essay outlines a ‘semi-Kantian’ theory of private law, which is like Kant’s in that it understands private law as a means of instituting and protecting private freedom. Yet, semi-Kantians insist that the choice between different private law programs, which respect private freedom equally well, can at times be justified by considerations of aggregate welfare and distributive justice, as well as other considerations that concern the impact on society as a whole.

     

Global social media vs local values: Private international law should protect local consumer rights by using the public policy exception?

This article focuses on the relationship between forum selection clauses, choice of law clauses and data protection and privacy protection. In particular, it discusses the question whether and why jurisdiction and choice of law clauses used in the terms of social media providers should not be enforced against social media users located in a different jurisdiction. The article distinguishes between the contractual, private law analysis and the application of public policy as part of the private international law analysis. The contract law analysis is centred on doctrines such as unconscionability, which in turn examines issue such as fairness and overwhelming bargaining power of one party. By contrast, the public policy analysis in private international law focuses on fundamental rights, legality of contractual clauses according to the local law of the forum and the interests of justice. It is argued here that both aspects (contractual and public policy doctrines) are paramount for achieving not only justice between the parties of a dispute but also ensuring good administration of justice in the public interest.     

To Wonderland Through the Looking-glass: Conceiving a Critical Legal Argument for Contractual Justice in the South African Law of Contract †

The aim of this paper is to identify the possible substructure (looking glass/es) of a critical legal argument for contractual justice (Wonderland) in the South African law of contract. South African contract law still fails, ten years after the constitutional transformation, to reflect the constitutional ideals of freedom, equality and human dignity in an acceptable manner. I argue that this disposition places a question mark over the legitimacy of contract law and marginalizes opportunities for the social change envisaged by the Constitution. The paper explores Duncan Kennedy’s Form and Substance-argument and indicates that the reluctance to accommodate these values may be attributable to the fact that the majority of role-players position themselves on the individualism/rules side of Kennedy’s continuum – a paradigm that perceives the law of contract as a body of positivistic rules to be applied neutrally and regardless of the social or socio-economic distortions its application may generate. In an attempt to move away from this traditional approach, the privileged paradigm is criticised. A typical CLS-approach is followed which employs sociology, psychological jurisprudence and game theory to criticise the law from outside the restrictive realms of law itself. Simultaneously, I attempt to illuminate the argument for a shift (step through the looking glass) to another paradigm. I conclude that our judiciary finds itself in a position similar to that of Plato’s prisoners in the cave and will not reach the point where they apply relevant (constitutional) values directly to contractual disputes. The State is thus responsible for infusing contract law with contractual justice, by implementing legislation to this effect in order to limit the hegemonic consequences of the judiciary’s obsession with freedom of contract and utopian rules, which fail in reality to further the ideal of justice. Paper presented at the Critical Legal Conference, 4 September 2004, London, UK. This paper is dedicated to the memory of the late Judge of Appeal, Mr. Justice P.J. Olivier. The paper is based on research conducted for the thesis in partial fulfilment of the degree LLD in the Faculty of Law at the University of Pretoria under the title ‘A critical legal argument for contractual justice in the South African law of contract.’ The degree supervisor is Professor Karin van Marle in the Department of Legal History, Comparative Law and Jurisprudence. The author wishes to thank the following persons for valuable deliberations and input: Karin van Marle, Graham Bradfield and Anashri Pillay. In addition, the author wishes to acknowledge and thank the University of Cape Town for financially supporting this research. †Paper presented at the Critical Legal Conference, 4 September 2004, London, UK. This paper is dedicated to the memory of the late Judge of Appeal, Mr. Justice P.J. Olivier. The paper is based on research conducted for the thesis in partial fulfilment of the degree LLD in the Faculty of Law at the University of Pretoria under the title ‘A critical legal argument for contractual justice in the South African law of contract.’ The degree supervisor is Professor Karin van Marle in the Department of Legal History, Comparative Law and Jurisprudence. The author wishes to thank the following persons for valuable deliberations and input: Karin van Marle, Graham Bradfield and Anashri Pillay. In addition, the author wishes to acknowledge and thank the University of Cape Town for financially supporting this research. apply relevant (constitutional) values directly to contractual disputes. The State is thus responsible for infusing contract law with contractual justice, by implementing legislation to this effect in order to limit the hegemonic consequences of the judiciary’s obsession with freedom of contract and utopian rules, which fail in reality to further the ideal of justice.     

合同自由与合同信用监管研究

合同自由是《合同法》的基本原则之一,在现代社会中若对合同自由的绝对放任,就会使合同自由背离合同正义;反之过分干预,就有可能缩小私法自治的空间,侵害私人权利。合同信用监管则是对合同自由的限制,这是一项有中国特色的法律制度,它是指工商行政管理部门等在职权范围内依照法律、行政法规的规定,对合同签订和履行等进行监督和处理的行政监督管理活动。本文在对合同自由和合同信用监管基本理论分析阐述的基础上,就我国在当前形势下妥善处理两者之间关系．以促进经济交往顺利进行和社会经济秩序的正常发展等提出相应的建议。     

分配正义与收益公正分配

收益公正分配是转型时期社会公正的重要维度,维系人权保护、经济发展、社会稳定与国家治理,蕴涵着分配正义理论。多种因素决定经济法分配正义是复合正义,强化在市场分配机制基础上的国家再分配职能,以促进社会基本结构的公正。经济法分配正义理论通过奠定收益分配之理论基础,提供收益分配之制度属性的路径促进收益公正分配,进而实现以社会公正为中心的可持续经济发展,推动中国社会顺利转型。而以分配正义为衡量尺度,我国收益分配制度需要进一步完善。     

The Relational Principle of Trust and Confidence

This article seeks to explain why, in terms of Iain Macneil'srelational theory of contract, the implied mutual duty of trustand confidence can be described as a quintessentially relationalnorm. The role played by the duty in the development of a relationalapproach to variation of the employment contract is examined.The potential for the trust duty to become a relational principleinforming the content of the employment contract is explored.The impact of litigation based on the trust duty in creatinga relational approach to employees’ contractual remediesat common law, which have traditionally been dominated by thenotice rule, is assessed. Finally, the potential for there todevelop a relational principle of trust and confidence capableof, to some extent, unifying the contractual, statutory andtortious elements of the law of the employment relationshipis examined.     

公用事业公私合作合同的法律属性与规制路径——基于经济法视野的考察

公用事业公私合作合同是国家规范公用事业公私合作活动的重要法律工具,具有经济法的属性,应接受公法与私法的双重规制。就公法规制来说,政府应保留一定的公权力,并承担相应的义务,同时,私人部门也应承担一定的公法义务,其部分私权利要接受公法的限制。就私法规制来看,主要体现在基于契约精神对政府公权力进行限制,并要求政府承担相应的合作风险,以及在违反合同义务的时候,承担相应的民事法律责任。     

契约理念引入行政法的背景分析——基础与条件

市场经济和市场经济下的行政机关与公民的关系 ,既是行政法和契约的基础 ,也构成了二者结合的基础 ;民主为契约理念在行政法中的确立奠定了观念与制度的基础 ,也正是民主孕育着行政法的契约精神 ,而行政职能的转变及多元化行政的出现 ,为契约在行政法中的应用提供了广阔的空间 ;法治理念与契约理念有着异曲同工之妙 ,二者互为基础 ;立法对契约的规定与行政的实际运作 ,表明了契约理念的确立已具有现实的可行与必要。契约理念确立的条件 ,可从行政、行政相对人、行政关系中的利益及契约与依法行政的结合等方面来解读 :行政的开放性与文化支撑性、行政相对人的独立性和参与性、行政关系中不同利益的可交换性、契约与依法行政的相融性。     

“程序公正感受”研究及其启示

从 #" 世纪 ’" 年代开始,西方学者对程序公正的研究从伦理哲学分析转向社会心理学分析,试图揭示程序公正的心理规律。研究发现：程序公正的要素并没有绝对标准,具有一定的情境敏感性;不过,程序公正在促进人们接受法律、法律决定和从事积极行为等方面具有比结果公正更为重要的地位,这种现象甚至具有跨越文化、种族、性别的普遍性。为了对此进行解释,西方学者提出了发言权理论、团体价值理论、人际关系理论和公正启发理论等模式,各自都具有一定的解释力。不过,程序公正也有可能成为社会权威转移真实矛盾“欺骗”社会成员的统治策略。对于转型期的我国,程序公正感受研究带给我们的不是其具体的结论,而是告诉我们,研究公正问题时,应当抛开宏大话语,努力探寻中国人心目中的公正观。     

Contract Law as Fairness

This article examines the implications for contract law of Rawls' theory of justice as fairness. It argues that contract law as an institution is part of the basic structure of society and as such subject to the principles of justice. Discussing the basic structure in relation to contract law is particularly interesting because it is instructive for both contract law and Rawlsian theory. On the one hand, justice as fairness has clear normative implications for the institution of contract law. On the other hand, this discussion forces us to critically assess the meaning and appeal of the concept of a basic structure in justice as fairness.     

A Memorial for jeremy bentham: memory,fiction, and writing the law

At a moment when the European Union and globalisation are, in their different contexts, bringing systems of traditional law (like the Common Law), whose texts are presented as monuments to historical legal cultures, into confrontation with systems of written law which claim to be rational embodiments of universal principles of liberal justice, how might we remember Jeremy Bentham, the pioneer of the critique of the former in the name of the latter? This essay in ‘law-and-literature’ looks at the relation between memory, fiction and writing in both the Common Law and in the two last projects for which the radical legal positivist sought to be remembered: the Constitutional Code for the Use of All Nations and All Governments Professing Liberal Opinions (1830) and Auto-Icon: Or, Farther Uses of the Dead to the Living (published posthumously in 1842). By examining Bentham’s linguistic theory and practice, the article raises questions about the relations between the ‘law’ of writing and the writing of law.     

Hobbes’ Frontispiece: Authorship,Subordination and Contract

In this article I argue that the famous image on Hobbes’ frontispiece of Leviathan provides a more honest picture of authority and of contract than is provided by today’s liberal images of free and equal persons, who are pictured as sitting round a negotiating table making a decision as to the principles on which to base laws. Importantly, in the seventeenth century, at the start of modern political thought, Hobbes saw no contradiction between contractual agreement and subordination. I will draw out these arguments by comparing three images of politics that employ the human body: Hobbes’ frontispiece is compared firstly with an earlier picture of the state, the illustration of the Fable of the Belly, and then with a later Rawlsian image of the social contract described above. At stake is Hobbes’ view of two associated concepts: authorship and authority. I argue that Hobbes’ image is a vivid portrayal of a ‘persona covert’, akin to the feme covert, a wife characterised in common law as so dominated by her husband that she is imagined as being ‘covered’ by his body.     

论国家科技计划项目合同的私法属性及制度构建

国家科技计划项目合同是国家科技管理部门与科研机构或科研人员之间,为实现国家科技计划、完成特定科研项目,确立双方权利义务关系而订立的合同。它是一种特殊的科研合同,属于私法契约范畴。目前我国国家科技计划项目合同制度存在着计划项目任务书与合同相混淆、合同性质不清、合同主体不清晰、权利义务不对等、具体合同条款内容设计不科学、责任性质不明确、纠纷救济机制和途径不清晰等缺陷和问题。在明确该合同为民事合同的前提下,有必要对其进行相应的制度重构。     

论我国刑事司法模式的回应型改造

司法实践过程中出现的诸多困境反映出我国当前的刑事司法改革在目的观念、价值选择、组织结构和裁判理念上面临着一系列冲突。作为一种法治发展范式,回应型法理论主张以契约关系作为回应的逻辑前提,以开放和参与作为权威的构成要素,以目的作为规则和制度的评价标准,以司法审查作为公共政策形成的重要途径,其所蕴含的价值取向为我国的刑事司法改革指明了一个新的方向。回应型刑事司法模式在目的、主体、角色分化及其对应的实现方式上呈现出显著的发展优势。长远来看,增强司法的回应性是我国刑事司法改革的必然选择,但短期内回应型刑事司法模式在我国的发展空间却较为有限,在模式改造过程中还存在压制性增强的风险。     

The grammar of administrative justice values

The debate concerning administrative justice in the UK often involves reliance upon a certain set of values. Examples of such values include openness, confidentiality, timeliness, transparency, secrecy, fairness, efficiency, accountability, user-friendliness, consistency, participation, rationality and equal treatment. These values are often deployed, both in academic and policy contexts, without much precision. This produces confusion which can hamper debate. This article therefore argues there is a need to reflect on how these oft-used values are deployed, and consider the particular concerns which underlie them. In this sense, this article suggests there is a need to refine the grammar of administrative justice. This argument is demonstrated through an extended analysis of the value of ‘user-friendliness’: a site of emerging disagreement in recent years. It proposes that an important distinction must be drawn between two understandings of the value: the ‘accessibility’ and ‘consumerist’ understandings. This article concludes by suggesting that, going forward, it is important to consider whether the use of abstractions is helpful at all in administrative law and justice debates.     

Social Constructionism and Criminology: Traditions,Problems and Possibilities

Over the last twenty years, the prison system, border controls, crime prevention programmes, anti‐terror measures and private security companies have expanded within Europe. This article discusses some of the implications. It will be argued that we are witnessing a paradigmatic shift in the manner in which state‐sanctioned force is employed. The distinction between what is criminal, to be dealt with by the justice system, and what creates a ‘perception of security’—formerly to be dealt with by social policy—is being eroded at both macro‐ (‘war on terror’) and micro‐ (‘public order’) levels. The rule of law is giving way to a security mentality, where force is employed on the basis of risk assessments. Social problems are re‐interpreted as security threats, and met with measures recreating the original threats. This gives the policy field a distinctive rationality of its own.     

医院未征得患者同意使用自费药纠纷初探——从社会法“倾斜保护”理论的视角出发

在基本医疗保险制度施行中,医保定点医院未征得患者同意使用自费药的行为构成对患者的一般侵权或侵权违约的竞合;针对医患双方实质地位的不平等,应运用民法及有关社会法的“倾斜保护”理论处理自费药纠纷且应授权执法者考虑个案的具体情况,决定医患双方间如何分担自费药费用,以实现公平正义的法律追求及维护医保患者的利益。     

Derrida and the Philosophy of Law and Justice

Readings of Derrida’s work on law and justice have tended to stress the distinction between them. This stress is complicated by Derrida’s own claim that it is not ‘a true distinction’. In this essay I argue that ordinary experiences of the inadequacy of existing laws do indeed imply a claim about what would be more just, but that this claim only makes sense insofar as one can appeal to another more adequate law (whether the projection of a new law or an existing ‘higher’ law). Exploring how Derrida negotiates a subtle path between classical Platonism and classical conventionalism about justice, the attempt is made to take seriously Derrida’s aim to affirm the idea of a ‘mystical’ foundation of the authority of laws by taking ‘the use of the word “mystical” in what I venture to call a rather Wittgensteinian direction’.