域外家事法院比较研究与我国家事法庭的构建

家事法院是为设计有别于普通法院而提出的概念,是为解决家事案件而设立的一个专门的审判机构。继美国最先提出建立家事法院后,世界各国纷纷效仿,其中日本无论是在家事法院的立法还是实践上都走在了世界的前列。在民事诉讼法改革的背景下,借鉴国外的家事法院模式,构建我国特色的家事法庭逐渐为学界认同。     

论家事审判机构之专门化——以家事法院（庭）为中心的比较分析

为了家事纠纷的妥当解决,很多国家建立了以家事法院（庭）为核心的家事审判专门机构。家事审判机构的专门化取决于多个因素：以离婚为核心的家庭事件不断增多,离婚率持续上升;家事事件日益复杂化;既有的审判程序不适合处理家事案件;传统法院（庭）在处理家事案件中存在局限性。建立专门化的家事审判机构不仅能更好的实现家事纠纷解决中的实质正义和综合效益,而且还能有效地保护未成年子女的合法权益。在我国家事纠纷数量居高不下、纠纷复杂程度日益提高、纠纷解决难度不断增大的背景下,我国也应当进行家事审判机构专门化的改革,建立符合我国需求的家事法院（庭）制度。     

家事诉讼与儿童利益保护

儿童利益是一种身份利益,具有显著的公益性,国家与社会必须给予特殊保护。涉及儿童的家事审判要遵循儿童利益最大化、儿童参与以及儿童优先保护等原则。从我国家事审判立法看,涉及儿童利益保护的规定散见于诸多的法律、司法解释以及政策性文件中,这些规定尽管为家事司法提供了基本的依据,但缺憾亦非常明显,表现为没有上位法的原则性规定,没有形成体系完整、结构合理的专门制度,部分立法规范前后矛盾,缺乏科学性和严谨性,缺乏实现儿童利益最大化的具体程序和相关配套机制。为此,有必要在基本法和部门法层面确立儿童利益最大化的法律原则;保障儿童表达意见权利和诉讼参与权;从司法层面看,确认儿童的诉讼主体地位,确立涉儿童家事案件职权探知、职权调查原则,建立专业化的家事审判机构。通过上述多重举措,真正实现家事审判对儿童利益的充分保障。     

我国家事审判改革路径之探析

加快我国家事审判的改革对于家事纠纷的解决具有重要意义.鉴于家事案件的特殊性,司法实践中存在的家事审判疑难,反复证明了一般的民事纠纷审判机制已不再适应当前中国的婚姻家庭纠纷的解决.家事审判改革不仅需要构建独立的家事审判机制,更应当重视家事审判理念的革新.我们应立足中国实际,从形成独立的家事审判机制,设立家事审判调解处和未成年人观察室,组建专业的家事法官团队及加快建成家事法院五个方面积极探索成功的我国家事审判改革路径.     

30年来我国家事纠纷解决机制的变迁及其启示——基于广东省某县与福建省厦门市五显镇实践的分析

30年来我国家事纠纷解决机制经历了从新中国成立后形成的着重调解的以司法为最终裁决的、齐抓共管的、多元纠纷解决机制协作的模式,到20世纪80年代中期民事司法改革、弱化法庭调解以及行政调处和民间调解等非诉纠纷解决方式、纠纷解决司法一元化及正规化的模式,再到近期衔接诉与非诉解决方式、重建多元化家事纠纷解决模式的两次变革。在这两次变革中,前者表现为对中国与家事因素的背离;后者有创新成分,但更大程度上是对传统资源的利用与恢复,是对中国与家事因素的回归。究其根源,前者很大程度上源于形式主义的法律理论,其在实践中的碰壁,促使人们再次重视基于中国本土经验的实践理性。这一教训和经验,不仅给全国范围内家事纠纷解决机制乃至其他类型纠纷解决机制的重建带来了有益的启示,同时也为纠正当前中国家事实体法片面回归民法、脱离实际的形式主义思维提供了重要的借鉴。     

家事案件审判体制改革之构想 以婚姻案件审判现状为背景

我国目前的婚姻案件(亦称婚姻家庭案件、家事案件、人事案件)审判体制存在严重缺陷,其集中表现就是"三无"与"多头主管"和"分散审判"。"三无"即无相应的审判程序、无独立的审判机构和专业法官。"多头主管",就是法院和民政部门都主管婚姻无效、撤销等婚姻纠纷。"分散审判",就是法院内部的婚姻案件实行"民行分立"的审判模式,即一般婚姻案件与婚姻行政案件分别由     

家事审判方式改革的方向与路径

家事案件形态多样,非讼与诉讼法理交错适用.我国未来应当根据案件类型塑造家事程序:对家事争讼案件适用辩论原则,对婚姻案件适用有限的职权探知原则,在家事非讼程序中则适用职权探知原则.此外,家事程序在调解与临时救济方面也具有特殊性.为了实现家事审判的专业化、集中化和保障裁判统一,我国未来不仅有必要实行集中管辖与程序集中原则以及创设灵活的管辖权转移规则,而且还可以尝试构建家事法院并选任掌握专业知识与丰富经验的家事法官,并尝试初步引入强制律师制度.     

论家事诉讼程序的构建

家事诉讼程序是专门用于审理和解决婚姻关系、亲子关系等身份关系纠纷的诉讼程序。法院对家事诉讼事件的审理以发现客观真实、追求实质公正为价值取向,以消除当事人之间的对立、恢复当事人之间的感情、促成当事人之间的和谐为根本目标。在家事诉讼程序中,辩论主义、处分原则、公开原则受到限制甚至排斥。我国应当制定有别于普通民事诉讼程序的家事诉讼程序,对当事人、当事人的诉讼行为能力、证据的收集、认定和举证时限、家事案件的调解、家事诉讼中的临时救济、家事诉讼程序判决的效力等作出专门的规定。     

家事审判改革视野下祖国大陆家事审判程序立法完善研究——兼以我国台湾“家事事件法”为学术视点

在祖国大陆,家事审判改革正在各试点法院积极开展。在此背景下,我们从学术的角度,对我国台湾"家事事件法"的"立法目的"及"基本原则"、家事事件的范围及分类、家事事件的调解程序、家事事件的诉讼模式、家事事件中保障弱者权益的制度等进行学术分析,进而考察祖国大陆家事审判程序法的立法与实践,结合祖国大陆实际,提出完善祖国大陆家事审判程序的立法构想,以期为我国当前的家事审判改革提供参考。     

我国家事非讼程序的立法设计——诉讼与非讼二元并立格局

家事案件从程序的角度可分为家事诉讼案件和家事非讼案件两大类型,域外大陆法系国家和地区在其单独的家事程序法中,大都依据案件类型实现了家事纠纷解决程序的“诉讼与非讼二元并立格局”。我国没有单独的家事程序法,也没有诉讼与非讼程序分别立法的历史传统,因此,法院在适用“大一统”的《民事诉讼法》处理家事案件过程中,形成了诉讼与非讼案件全面“争讼化”的一元格局状态。随着我国家事审判改革的进一步深化,以及《民法典》“婚姻家庭编”和“继承编”对家事实体法律规范的完善,要制定单独的“家事程序法”,首先要充分认识到家事诉讼程序与家事非讼程序相互独立的地位,并基于案件类型与程序相称论、诉讼法理与非讼法理二元分离以及交错适用等理论,从立法上确立“诉讼与非讼二元并立格局”。进而从家事非讼程序的适用范围、审理原则、基本制度及统合处理等几方面,在诉讼法理和非讼法理交错适用的基础上,科学设置与家事诉讼程序相互独立的家事非讼程序,以充分发挥家事非讼程序的特殊司法功能,最终妥善及统合地处理复杂的家事案件。     

REEVALUATING WHERE WE STAND: A COMPREHENSIVE SURVEY OF AMERICA'S FAMILY JUSTICE SYSTEMS

The call for court reform remains critical in the face of the growing complexity of burgeoning family law cases nationwide. Many states have restructured their court systems using the unified family court model, resolving legal, personal, emotional, and social disputes with the aim of improving the well‐being of families and children. Other states utilize the traditional approach, resulting in cases being handled in a fragmented, time‐consuming and expensive manner. In this article, Professor Barbara A. Babb presents the results of her nationwide survey regarding how each state handles family law matters. The survey is a follow‐up to her comprehensive 1998 survey and her 2002 survey update. The results of the recent analysis reveal that a total of thirty‐eight states now have either statewide family courts, family courts in selected areas of the state, or pilot or planned family courts, representing seventy‐five percent of states. The number of states without a specialized or separate system to handle family law matters has decreased from seventeen states in 1998 to thirteen in 2006. These changes are significant when one considers the complexities involved in court reform. The need for court reform remains an urgent one, as family law cases occupy a significant percentage of court dockets across the country. Families and children deserve a court system where justice is effective and efficient and where their legal, personal, emotional, and social needs are resolved in a therapeutic and holistic manner.     

COMMENTARY ON "EMPIRICAL AND ETHICAL PROBLEMS WITH CUSTODY RECOMMENDATIONS:"

Whether or not custody evaluators, testifying as expert witnesses, continue to make specific custody recommendations, custody decision making will continue to be based upon inadequate and untested evidence unless and until we reform the family court system in American courtrooms. Judges and lawyers must have specialized knowledge and training about such things as the developmental needs of children, the effects of divorce on children, domestic violence, and child safety issues; lawyers must develop litigation as well as mediation and negotiation skills; specialized family courts utilizing individual calendars and case management techniques must be established; and the complexities and intellectual challenges of family law cases needs to be recognized.     

CHILDREN,THE UNCRC,AND FAMILY LAW IN ENGLAND AND WALES

There is no doubt that, overall, there has been a great deal of activity in relation to children's rights under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) since it was ratified by the UK government in 1991. Of particular significance in the context of family law, however, are the provisions of Article 12, which have in many ways proved to be more problematic than other provisions, not least because, in the context of family law, children's participation rights are necessarily juxtaposed with the long‐standing and hitherto unchallenged rights of parents to make important decisions about family life. The reorganisation in 2001 of the family court welfare services in England and Wales with the creation of the Children and Family Courts Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS), generated a new impetus for the consideration of children's participation rights and, at an organizational level, considerable progress has been made in embracing the provisions of the UNCRC. More problematic, however, is the acceptance of children's participation in making decisions about their futures by adults using and working in the family justice system. At the level of the courts, judicial attitudes are slow to change and in England, as court judgments often demonstrate, these are firmly rooted in a view of children as being incompetent in such issues; at the level of parents using the system, it is arguable that new discourses about the best interests of the child serve as a proxy for continuing discourses about parents’ rights that have become evident, most recently, in the context of an increasingly influential fathers’ rights lobby; and at the level of welfare practitioners, recent research also demonstrates that, although the rhetoric of children's rights is widely accepted, the willingness and ability to make these real in the context of family proceedings is, for a variety of reasons, less in evidence.     

‘It’s Not OK’, but ‘It’ never happened: parental alienation accusations undermine children’s safety in the New Zealand Family Court

ABSTRACT

While the public campaign slogan in New Zealand when referring to family violence, is ‘It’s Not OK’, many women in New Zealand report that the Family Court prefers the catchphrase ‘It never happened’. When women and children escaping violence and abuse reach out to the New Zealand Family Court for protection believing the justice system will help them, they often enter an alternative reality where they are not believed and are subsequently made less safe. This is particularly so for those women whose well-founded fears for their children’s safety get reinterpreted as evidence of a deliberate attempt to alienate the children from their fathers. The Backbone Collective, an independent organisation, surveyed New Zealand women about their experiences in the Family Court, finding that many women reported being accused of parental alienation. This paper investigates the sources of these allegations of parental alienation and how they impact mothers and their children. We argue that the use of parental alienation in the New Zealand Family Court is undermining the international rights of children.     

“全域数字法院”的构建与实现

近年来中国互联网司法发展取得了显著成效,为建设一种全新的法院样态——"全域数字法院"提供了可能。与既往的法院信息化建设不同,"全域数字法院"是一场重塑性的制度革命,它以线上线下深度融合、内网外网共享协同、有线无线互联互通为基本要求,更加注重系统集成与数字赋能,更加注重流程再造与制度重塑,更加注重全面数字化与高度智能化,运用"技术+制度"为实现更高水平的公平正义注入新效能。建设"全域数字法院",主要路径是通过"平台化建设""无纸化转型""智能化赋能"三阶段,打造全生命周期的司法平台,提供全时空在线的司法服务,构建全流域智能的司法模式,驱动司法制度的全方位变革,并最终实现司法领域从数字赋能到制度重塑的革命性变革。     

‘Our normal is different’: autistic adults’ experiences of the family courts

ABSTRACT

This article reports the findings of a small-scale qualitative study exploring the experiences of autistic adults who have had experience of the family justice system. While participants related some positive elements to their experiences, in particular with regard to the willingness of professionals to try to learn more about their clients’ needs, the overall picture showed significant concerns. The reports given showed significant misunderstandings about autism, and a system which struggled to make appropriate adjustments which would allow autistic court users to have access to justice on an equivalent basis to non-autistic litigants. This situation stands in contrast to the position regarding other disabilities in the Family Justice System, but also to the relatively greater level of provision for autistic people within the Criminal Justice System. Based on participants’ experiences and existing good practice in other areas, we make recommendations that could be adopted by the Family Court and practitioners.     

证人保护与被告人权利保障

刑事诉讼法修正案草案规定了更加完善的证人保护制度,但证人保护与被告人知悉权、对质权可能发生冲突,各国为此采取了不同的措施予以平衡,包括限制披露证人身份信息和采用视频技术或设置屏障的方式出庭作证等。刑事诉讼法修正案草案有必要在平衡证人保护与被告人权利保障的基础上完善证人保护制度。     

MEDIATION IN THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

The chief justice of the Australian Family Court discusses the use of mediation in the Family Court of Australia. He traces the legislative origin and the basic purposes of the service. Of particular interest is the differentiation between mediation, conciliation, and the court process. The limitations are also discussed, especially the use of mediation in domestic violence situations.     

四级两审制的发生和演化

司法体制改革的一个重要举措是设立最高人民法院巡回法庭,这一改革举措可能意味着我国法院层级或审级变化的新动向.从建国以来的历史经验看,法院层级和审级变化并非彼此孤立,且都从属于国家政治形态设计.1954年中共中央取消大区分院,促动了法院审级由三审制改为两审制.两审制带来的法院功能和案负变化,导致中级人民法院层级的设立.为了保障四级两审制平滑运作,民事调解制度扩大,基层法院派出法庭普遍设立.这一法院层级和审级制度的设立,契合了扩大省级地方权力的政治目标.1983年以来“地改市”运动、民事调解制度的萎缩以及撤销部分派出法庭,使得四级两审制的基础发生松动,法院层级和审级方面的新变化由此产生.