非婚同居“合法化”的理性思考

非婚同居作为一种男女结合和家庭生活方式日益为大多数人接受、理解和宽容,并对传统婚姻和家庭产生巨大的冲击。而我国法律没有赋予同居者以法律地位,也未对这种既成事实的男女结合和家庭模式予以规制。国家对未婚同居进行科学的制度构建,调整公民之间的非婚同居关系,赋予非婚同居者一定的权利和义务,才能解决由于非婚同居发生的纠纷,保护民事主体的合法权益。     

论事实婚姻与非婚同居的二元化规制

<正>缔结婚姻不仅是男女两性结合的个人行为,而且也是社会行为,古今中外,或多或少实行一定的结婚形式要求,结婚一直构成形式自由原则的例外,结婚形式成为社会承认婚姻的方式和途径。我国现行婚姻法以结婚登记形式规范结婚行为,以确立婚姻关系的合法有效。但在现实生活,仍大量存在没有进行结婚登记而同居的两性关系,由此产生的事实婚姻和非婚同居问题长期困扰法律界。     

无效婚姻制度探析

无效婚姻制度是2001年《中华人民共和国婚姻法》新增设的一项制度,填补了立法空白,是婚姻立法上的重大进步.无效婚姻是指违反婚姻成立要件的违法婚姻,本文对无效婚姻的法定事由、宣告机关及法律后果等方面的缺陷进行了分析,提出了完善的立法建议:1、建立结婚登记公示制度;2、应缩小自始无效婚的范围,扩大可撤销婚的范围;3、确认和宣告婚姻无效的机关应仅限于人民法院;4、自始无效婚有溯及力,可撤销婚无溯及力;5、当事人所生子女视同婚生子女;6、增设无效婚姻的侵权制度.     

建立我国非婚同居的法律制度

近年来,传统的婚姻家庭思想观念正受到越来越大的挑战,非婚同居现象的增多是其主要表现之一,但这一现象在我国却没有得到很好的法律规制,由此引发了许多纠纷。本文认为应当从维护合法婚姻的权威和保护相关当事人正当权益出发,理性分析并界定非婚同居的法律地位,参照和借鉴国外的有关立法经验,构建符合我国国情的非婚同居法律制度,以实现法律的调控作用。     

非婚同居引发的青春损失费索赔问题思考

我国现行法律规范针对非婚同居的问题态度较为模糊,缺乏具体的法律规制,但不可否认的是非婚同居的现象已逐年增多,并且由非婚同居引发的法律纠纷也层出不穷。例如同居关系解除后引发的"青春损失费"、"青春损失赔偿费"、"分手费"等各种名目索要的赔偿费和补偿费问题引发了较大的争议。本文主要针对符合法定婚姻实质要件但未进行婚姻登记的男女双方非婚同居所引发的类似青春损失费争议进行讨论,有配偶者与他人同居不在本文讨论范围之列。     

论非婚同居关系解除时的财产问题

非婚同居是在法律婚姻关系之外的一种同居关系,而且其在全世界具有与日俱增的趋势,这是我们社会现实中一个不可否认的事实。非婚同居带给我们的究竟是一种全新的生活方式,还是对传统婚姻制度的背离,这已不再是问题的焦点,因为非婚同居群体快速增长的发展趋势已是显而易见。非婚同居关系的不稳定性以及法律对其的规制缺失,导致非婚同居关系解除时产生的众多财产纠纷和社会矛盾,才是法律应当考虑的当务之急。     

浅论非婚同居财产纠纷法律问题

财产关系在非婚同居法律调整中居于核心地位。国外对非婚同居财产所有权归属分为独立财产主义和共同则产主义两种理论,我国对非婚同居的财产规制采取以协议财产制为主、辅以共同财产主义的形式。目前我国有关非婚同居财产纠纷的立法具有明显的滞后性和局限性。本文指出构建我国非婚同居财产纠纷法律制度应从非婚同居财产关系的内部法律效力和外部法律效力两个方面对我国非婚同居财产纠纷问题进行立法规制。     

浅论合伙制度在非婚同居财产分配领域的应用

一位西方法学家曾经指出:合伙也许是人类群体本能最古老的表现形式。合伙作为一种古老的组织形式,从最开始的契约发展到现代的合伙,已经有了相当完备的组织制度。近几年,非婚同居现象在世界各国普遍出现,给各国婚姻制度造成了极大挑战,尤其是非婚同居的财产问题一直没有得到很好解决。本文试图从合伙制度的角度对非婚同居财产问题进行分析,在尚未明确立法的前提下,寻求衡平的解决方法。     

浅论合伙制度在非婚同居财产分配领域的应用

一位西方法学家曾经指出：＂合伙也许是人类群体本能最古老的表现形式＂。合伙作为一种古老的组织形式,从最开始的契约发展到现代的合伙,已经有了相当完备的组织制度。近几年,非婚同居现象在世界各国普遍出现,给各国婚姻制度造成了极大挑战,尤其是非婚同居的财产问题一直没有得到很好解决。本文试图从合伙制度的角度对非婚同居财产问题进行分析,在尚未明确立法的前提下,寻求衡平的解决方法。     

论建构我国的事实婚姻制度

本文认为我国现行法对事实婚姻的规定实质上否定了共同生活的事实也可以作为缔结婚姻关系的一种形式,事实婚姻制度并未建立起来。但是基于婚姻关系事实在先的特征、事实婚姻在我国大量存在的实际情况、我国传统婚姻习俗和文化心理、结婚登记的性质等,我国有建立事实婚姻制度之必要。事实婚姻是指有婚意的男女双方以永久共同生活为目的,通过以夫妻名义共同生活的事实公示的两性的结合。事实婚姻一经认定并具有与法律婚姻相同的法律效力。     

非婚同居中女性健康权保护的法律困境及对策

规范非婚同居已经成为我国婚姻法学界的共识,但同居中女性的健康权问题却被忽略了。在司法实践中,许多法官往往用侵权法规则来解决相关的法律纠纷,在现行的法律框架下,这只是一种权宜之计。女性在非婚同居中的健康权不仅仅是女性健康不受侵犯的一种私法上的消极权利,也是一种积极的权利,国家有义务通过相关法律制度来保障女性健康权,这一点需要通过尽快制定非婚同居的法律来实现。     

Cohabitation from illegal to institutionalized practice: the case of Norway 1972–2010

The main objective of this article is to explore the institutionalization of cohabitation that occurred in Norwegian law in the period 1972–2010. From being (officially) illegal until 1972, cohabitation in its contemporary form has become majority practice, a child-rearing institution, as well as recognized in law in ways that blur the differences between cohabitation and marriage. Although cohabitation is common in many European countries, Norway is one of the few to have gone full circle. This article focuses on the changes in politicians’ ideas and norms regarding intimate relationships during this period. The empirical analysis is based on political documents and debates in the Norwegian parliament about cohabitation, marriage, single motherhood and the family.     

The polyamorous threat to nonmarriage

Some progressive U.S. Cities and several Canadian provinces now provide mechanisms for polyamorous families to register as such with state authorities. More than a million people in the United States identify as polyamorous and many more practice some form of ethical nonmonogamy. This article suggests that the growing recognition of polyamory poses a substantial threat to a simultaneous development in family law: the call by scholars and the Uniform Law Commission for courts to enforce a more implied contract, implied partnership and equitable claims in the context of non-marital conjugal cohabitation. Non-marital cohabitants argue that courts can infer marital-type commitments to share property from the fact of conjugal cohabitation. They argue that their nonmarriage should entitle them to the kinds of relief afforded to divorcing couples. But polyamorous conjugal cohabitation involves very different norms and commitments to reliance, partnership and transparency than does traditional marriage. Marital-type relief maps awkwardly, if at all, onto the reality of most polyamorous relationships. By bringing into relief that which we cannot necessarily assume about conjugal cohabitation, the recognition of polyamory questions what many proponents of more legal protection of nonmarital couples ask courts to assume about conjugal cohabitation, namely that it gives rise to reasonable reliance on a status quo and an intent to share property. Moreover, by providing a means for polyamorous households to register their relationships, polyamorous registration normalizes the idea of non-marital relationship registration. The more normal and expected it is for people who want rights as some form of family to register their familial intent with the state, the harder it is for those who have not so registered to argue that the state must treat them as some sort of family.     

Regulating Marriage and Cohabitation in 21st Century Britain

This article assesses the legal regulation of marriage and cohabitation in Britain and outlines a growing need and desire for the currently confused law to be amended despite what has been termed 'the normal chaos of family law'. It adds to the topical debate about 'couple regulation' and argues that law should protect the function rather than the form of relationships. This argument is supported by recent Nuffield Foundation funded research, which draws on a major attitudinal survey of over 3000 respondents' views about marriage, cohabitation and the law and a number of in-depth interviews with current and former cohabitants. This research supports the view that cohabitation is now an accepted parenting and partnering structure across Britain, and that this ought to be reflected in a 'reflexive' approach to legal regulation in this sphere.     

Ignorance in Bliss: Modeling Knowledge of Rights in Marriage and Cohabitation

We live our lives against an extensive backdrop of legal rights and responsibilities, yet a growing number of studies indicates low levels of public legal literacy. In the context of opposite‐sex cohabitation and marriage law, this study employs new survey data from the United Kingdom to explore, in detail, how many and which people are ignorant of the law, and what are the nature and origins of erroneous beliefs. We find that people's beliefs about both cohabitation and marriage law are frequently wrong. They are also strikingly similar, and reflect the divergence of social attitudes from the law. Our findings are consistent with the notion that legal literacy links to salience of issue. They are also consistent with recent public legal education initiatives that affected public understanding of cohabitation law, but we argue that social attitudes and the intransigence of erroneous beliefs generally present significant challenges to such initiatives.     

论结婚登记程序瑕疵的处理——兼评“《婚姻法》司法解释(三)征求意见稿”第1条

不能以结婚登记程序瑕疵为由撤销婚姻登记,婚姻的效力也不因为结婚登记程序的瑕疵而受影响。对程序瑕疵的结婚登记予以补正或重新确认是可行的。婚姻登记程序的规范意义,重点在于规范婚姻登记机关的行为,违反婚姻登记程序应当依照行政诉讼法的规定作出确认违法的判决。     

试论我国无效婚姻立法的缺陷及完善

我国《婚姻法》虽然有无效婚姻的规定,但立法上仍然存在一些缺陷,给司法实践解决相关问题造成了困难。例如,对因疾病导致婚姻无效的规定不明确;对无效婚姻的认定缺乏行政救济途径;对当事人提出的婚姻确认之诉实行一审终审,不利于保护其合法权益;受害一方在婚姻被确认无效后得不到相应的民事赔偿等。笔者认为应该对无效婚姻立法进行修改完善:在实体法律上明确、细化不宜结婚的疾病种类及不同疾病禁止结婚的条件,在认定程序上适用二审终审制,在行政救济上赋予婚姻登记机关认定无效婚姻的权力,在民事赔偿上建立无效婚姻受害一方损害赔偿制度。     

From lack of status to contract: assessing the French Pacte Civil de Solidarité

It has been suggested that the nature of marriage could be varied by private contract. In France a similar effect has been achieved by allowing couples to enter into an institution delimited by law but regulated by contract. Thousands of cohabiting couples have chosen to register a Pacte Civil de Solidarité . This suggests a strong desire for a real alternative to marriage and raises important issues about commitment in modern relationships. It is speculated that PaCS is likely to rank below marriage but above cohabitation in terms of relationship quality, stability and protection of the weaker party.     

Marriage,Cohabitation, and Crime: Differentiating Associations by Partnership Stage

A wealth of scholarship generally finds that marriage protects against crime, but there is less consistent evidence for cohabitation. In this article, we contribute to scholarship on marriage and put forward new evidence about cohabitation by examining marital and cohabiting partnerships as transitions with distinct stages of entry, stability, and dissolution. We use within-person change models with contemporary data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 to analyze these stages for the full sample and separately for men and women. The findings show differential protective associations of marriage and cohabitation depending on the stage of the partnership. Both recently formed cohabiting partnerships and stable cohabiting partnerships are associated with reductions in the level of offending, although to a lesser degree than marital relationships. Cohabiting partnerships that are stable, in that they have lasted at least a year, are associated with larger decreases in offending, particularly among women.