法律的不确定性与法治的可能性

法律的不确定性并不意味着法律合法性的丧失和法治理想破灭。法律体系必然包括不确定的法律。法律不确定性与法律的客观性是相容的。主流法律理论并不必然坚持法律的确定性立场,但是必然坚持法律的客观性立场。法治理念的经典阐述者富勒、拉兹和菲尼斯都强调法律的明确性、可预测性和稳定性。他们都没有把法律的确定性列为法治的要件。法律的不确定性意味着法官在疑难案件中需要行使自由裁量权并创制新的法律。只要不确定的司法判决具有合法性、客观性和可预测性,即使法律是不确定的,法治理想的实现也是可能的。     

国外关于刑事生效裁判矫正制度的历史与现状

<正> 已经发生法律效力的裁判,具有普遍的约束力。一旦确立,不得擅自更改。这是刑事诉讼中一个古老的法则。但是,已经确立的判决,未必就是完全正确的。事实上,在多种因素的影响下,有时甚至是错误的。这种判决的确定性和其实性之间的矛盾,从刑事诉讼产生的那一天起就自始至终存在着。那么人类历史上不同社会形态之间,以及同一社会形态的不同国家之间是如何调和两者之间的冲突的呢?换句话说,当已经确定生效了的判决确有错误之时,     

从法院判决的稳定性解读法律运行的不确定性

对同一案件事实,相同的诉讼证据,不同的法官为何会有不同的认定?同类的案件,相近的事实,为什么不同的法院会作出截然相反的判决?这种法律在运行过程中,由于受到各种因素的制约与影响,使立法者的立法初衷在法律实践中发生了各种形式的变异,就是法律运行的不确定性。本文将在现行司法体制的框架下,剖析法律运行中的不确定性因素,探讨降低法律运行不确定性的对策。以期降低各种不确定性因素对司法行为的不当影响,提高司法能力,构筑法治状态下的和谐社会。     

论法律的确定性与不确定性

崇尚法律的确定性,是西方法学界一个悠久的学术传统。20世纪以来,西方法学界关于这一问题的立场发生了根本转变,转而强调法律的不确定性。在法律运行的过程中,存在着多种不确定性因素,包括法律标准的不确定性、事实认定的不确定性、司法人员个性的不确定性和其他社会因素的不确定性等四个方面。无论是法律的确定性,还是法律的不确定性,都是相对的,而且,二者都蕴藏着一定的社会价值。     

浅析我国外观设计侵权判定标准

当前我国对外观设计的保护是对工业品所使用的外观设计的整体所提供的保护,因此在判断是否侵犯外观设计专利权时,通常以公告中的图片或照片确定外观设计专利权保护范围,再判断两产品是否整体相同或相近似。但是这种判定标准充满着不确定性,也容易造成判决结果的不统一。     

法律的不确定性问题研究

从法律以语言文字为载体的特质来看,法律的不确定性缘于语言本身的不确定及语言与客观世界的非对应性。但探寻储藏于法律概念中的价值的不确定性,却是法律不确定性的根本原因。法律的不确定性表现为法律概念、法律规则、法律规范竞合三个不同层次上的不确定。法律的不确定性与追求法律的稳定性、可预测性相悖,但其仍有极大的价值,分别体现在立法的指导思想、认识成文法的局限性和法官在司法裁判中的能动性三个方面。司法裁判过程是法律从不确定走向确定的过程,不确定性法律之确定的根本在于价值补充。法律的不确定性决定了在司法过程中不得不在一定程度上引入人的能动因素即法官的创造性,建立能动的司法制度。     

开放的法律文本——论法的不确定性

法律,作为一项对具体的行为进行合法或违法评判的活动,应当是确定的。＂法律形式主义＂和＂规则主义＂认为,只要是有确定的事实,就一定能够找出应适用的法律,也就一定能够得出一个正确的判决。随着社会的发展和科技的进步,封闭的法律体系不断受到外界的冲击和诘难,在美国现实主义法学派的推动下,法律的不确定性被推向极致。     

履行判决变更判决分析

在行政诉讼判决类型中 ,较多涉及司法权与行政权二者关系的是履行判决和变更判决。将拒绝行为排除在履行判决之外存在弊端 ,应从实质意义上界定行政不作为 ;在履行判决中法院原则上应尽可能详细确定被告应履行义务的具体内容 ,这不违背权力分立原则。适用于裁量事项是我国变更判决与其他国家变更判决的主要区别 ,我国变更判决仍有扩展使用的余地。     

司法独立与媒体监督刑案报道模式应当转变

虽然我国法律是不是已经接受了"无罪推定"还存在着很大争议,不过"未经人民法院依法判决,对任何人都不得确定有罪",这可是1996年修改后的<刑事诉讼法>的明文规定.法律说未经判决,不得确定有罪,无疑包括了媒介不得作"确定有罪"的报道和宣传.     

论既判力的本质

既判力是指确定的终局判决所具有的拘束力。按照既判力原理,在民事诉讼中,法院的判决确定之后,无论该判决有无误判,当事人均受判决的拘束,不得就该判决的内容再进行争执。同时作为享有国家审判权的法院当然也必须尊重自己以国家名义所作出的判断,即使是把同一事项再次作为问题在诉讼中提出时,亦应以该判断为基础斟酌当事人之间的关系。那么,确定判决为什么具有此种拘束力呢?其所以能拘束当事人及法院不得再行争执的依据何在?这     

The Influence of Personal Values on Legal Judgments

The non‐legal factors that influence judicial decisions have been the subject of extensive debate. Theoretical and empirical work has focused on factors including political ideology, activism, attitudes, and demographics. Personal values are related to these factors and are central to decision making. The study described in this article translated theories and techniques from psychological research to examine the role of personal values in judicial decision making. A novel method of assessment of value expression in legal opinions revealed a different pattern of values expressed in the majority and minority opinions of a case that divided the Supreme Court. An empirical study of legal academics extended this analysis and highlighted the significant influence of personal values on legal decisions. The value:decision paradigm provides a new framework to analyse judicial decision making, judicial division, and judicial discretion and has significant implications for judicial diversity.     

人体内乙醇含量检测的影响因素分析

人体内乙醇含量检测不仅是法医鉴定工作中常规检测项目,也是交通肇事案件最终的仲裁依据,其检测结果直接影响着受检人员的责任判罚。本文根据乙醇的毒理特征及在人体内的代谢过程,就不同检材、送检时效性、尸体腐败、血液检品中不同成分和保存方式、以及检测结果的不确定度等对乙醇含量检测结果的影响进行分析,以利于对受检者是否饮酒及其程度做出科学、公正的判定。     

Ex Turpi Causa: Reformation not Revolution

Seldom has an area of law been so afflicted with uncertainties and contradictions as the illegality defence and rarely have judicial opinions been so sharply divided as in the Supreme Court decision in Patel v Mirza where nine Justices examined the issue of the correct approach to the illegality defence. Six of them endorsed the ‘range of factors’ approach, whereas three condemned it. This paper defends the majority's approach against the minority's criticisms but argues that refinements should be made to it in order to address the uncertainty that may arise from its application.     

司法的不法与司法的不正义（下）——违背实在法证成原则和衡平与正义原则

在司法过程中，法官不依法裁判就是司法的不法，没有公平与公正裁判就是司法的不正义。在司法领域也存在着如下的拉德布鲁赫公式：在司法的不法与虽不正义但仍属依法裁判的司法之间划出一条截然分明的界限是不可能的，但最大限度明晰地作出另外一种划界还是可能的，即凡正义根本不被追求或构成正义之核心的公开、公平、公正原则有意不被承认的司法裁决，就不仅仅是司法的不正义，它根本上就是司法的不法。     

司法的不法与司法的不正义（上）——违反正当法律程序

在司法过程中,法官不依法裁判就是司法的不法,没有公平与公正裁判就是司法的不正义。在司法领域也存在着如下的拉德布鲁赫公式：在司法的不法与虽不正义但仍属依法裁判的司法之间划出一条截然分明的界限是不可能的,但最大限度明晰地作出另外一种划界还是可能的,即凡正义根本不被追求或构成正义之核心的公开、公平、公正原则有意不被承认的司法裁决,就不仅仅是司法的不正义,它根本上就是司法的不法。     

STATE SUPREME COURT APPLICATIONS OF TROXEL v. GRANVILLE AND THE COURTS' RELUCTANCE TO DECLARE GRANDPARENT VISITATION STATUTES UNCONSTITUTIONAL

In this article, the author reviews state supreme court applications of Troxel v. Granville , analyzing the impact of the decision on the courts' ongoing efforts to adjudicate visitation disputes between parents and grandparents. Set against a background of legislative recognition of grandparents' rights and judicial uncertainty regarding the appropriate role of nonparents in children's lives, Troxel reaffirmed the constitutional right of parents to direct their children's upbringing. The author argues that state supreme courts evaluating gradparent visitation statutes and seeking to enforce Troxel 's presumption in favor of parents should be more willing to strike down overly broad statutes. Such an approach would be a positive step toward addressing the excessive judicial discretion that the Troxel Court found so problematic, and would signal to state legislatures the need for statutes that both provide for the needs of children and protect parental rights.     

Judges as satisficers: a law and economics perspective on judicial liability

If judges are guardians of the law, who is to protect the individual member of society from the occasional corrupt, malicious, or reckless judge? The aim of this paper is to provide an answer to the last part of this question, focusing more heavily on cases of negligently inflicted harm. Departing from Simon’s bounded rationality and influenced by other constructs in behavioral law and economics, we view judges as satisficers who make decisions within real-world constraints, such as imperfect information and uncertainty, cognitive limitations and erroneous information. Judges are limited by the commonly observed barriers to the decision making process. Because their goal is not to optimize but to render opinions that are merely satisfactory, they often act as poor agents of their principals’ interests. In this light, it becomes clearer why judges tend to engage in behavior that is “improper”, especially under the circumstances of the currently overloaded judicial caseloads. We first address the differences in judges’ roles in Anglo-American and Continental legal systems. We then present our simple model for judicial misbehavior based on an understanding of judges as “satisficers”. Next we discuss the particularities of judicial errors and introduce a realistic and viable construct of “inexcusable judicial error”. On this basis we evaluate the impact of various incentive schemes on judicial behavior, focusing on the civil liability of judges. We conclude that civil liability for grave judicial errors is the most adequate remedy.     

论董事问责的诚信路径

董事经营决策的尊重审查模式契合了适应性效率的要求,有利于鼓励董事进行尝试性试验。但是,在商事判断规则作用下,董事问责需原告负担严苛的举证责任,董事决策审查形式化以及注意标准的不确定性,使得注意义务几乎被掏空,介于重大过失与恶意之间的董事失信情形往往逃脱法律责任。诚信路径不仅是问责空隙的填补机制,也是克服股东与董事之间信息不对称问题的重要机制。20世纪90年代以来董事问责的司法实践催生了诚信路径,诚信概念亦因创造性转化而获得新生,其行为标准日益明晰,司法审查可操作性增强。我国可通过《公司法》的司法解释界定诚信的行为标准,将故意让公司违法、不坦诚告知、滥用职权和严重失职纳入其涵摄范围,从而引入诚信问责路径。     

Judicial review of NLRB rulemaking in the health care industry: implications for labor and management

In 1987 the National Labor Relations Board set out to promulgate a rule to define the appropriate bargaining units for the health care industry, making the first use of its substantive rulemaking powers. This departure from the traditional process of adjudication of unit determination issues occurred because of thirteen years of NLRB frustration resulting from congressional admonition against proliferation of bargaining units and subsequent inconsistent judicial interpretation of that admonition. This article traces the factors that led to the decision to rulemake, discusses the development of the rule itself, and examines the rule's judicial experience to date. It presents empirical findings of hospital union election activity during the period from 1985 through 1987 that confirm the thesis that bargaining unit size is a significant variable in election outcomes. Finally, the authors assess the likely outcome of the impending Supreme Court decision on the rule, along with implications for labor and management.