民事证据随时提出、同时提出抑或适时提出——兼评《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法修正案(草案)》第65条

在法定顺序主义下,主张已经固定,有完善系统的审前程序,实行证据同时提出主义和逾期失权制度则有其合理基础。在自由顺序主义中,无审前程序固定主张和争点,则只能实行证据随时提出主义,但证据随时提出主义无法集中审理和诉讼拖延的弊端决定着其让位于增设审前程序后的证据适时提出主义。不像美国的证据开示制度,我国民事诉讼法不能随意证据失权,只能实行相对温和的证据适时提出主义,但也需相应完善审前程序。     

论我国民事再审制度的完善——兼谈申诉问题的理性解决

民事诉讼是人们为理性地解决民事纠纷而创设的一种程序 ,民事纠纷、民事诉讼的个性要求为当事人提供正当法律程序保障。申诉是一种非程序化的纠纷解决方式 ,申诉问题的严重存在 ,是人治社会公民缺乏正当法律程序保障的生动写照。申诉问题的理性解决 ,有赖于我国民事再审制度的完善。     

民事主体与民事诉讼主体有限分离论之反思

对民事主体与民事诉讼主体的关系,我国现今学界主流持有限分离论。此论是对现行法律的误读及对两主体关系应然与实然的混淆。实体法与程序法在主体制度上的失衡,已成为两法共同有效地实现保障权利、解决民事纠纷、维护社会经济秩序等民事诉讼目的的巨大障碍。自然人、法人、非法人团体的"三元"民事主体结构,应成为我国民事立法关于民事主体结构构建的基本结构。民事主体与民事诉讼主体,应当是内涵有别但外延一致的关系。     

论破产程序对担保物权优先性的限制

担保物权的优先性在民法中不可质疑,但在破产程序中,尤其在破产重整程序中则受到诸多限制.这种限制系破产程序本身的特点所决定,同时也是破产法立法价值嬗变的结果.基于利益衡平原则,对担保物权优先性的限制必须合理,我国这方面的立法尚存在诸多缺陷,有待进一步完善.     

How damages recovery actions can improve the fight against corruption: the crisis of criminal law policies and the role of private enforcement in an Italian case of judicial corruption

In many countries corruption is rife, despite the fact that there is a criminal-law legislative framework for corruption. Italy is one of these countries. The commitment of judges and prosecutors to combating instances of corruption is often frustrated by the consequences of the excessive length of the proceedings. The fight against corruption has been carried out mainly in the field of criminal law. The criminalisation of corruption both in domestic and in international contexts is not enough to reduce corrupt practices. In the last decade another front in the fight against corruption has been explored: the private law approach as a complement to criminal law policies. Indeed, the same corrupt practise may be subject both to criminal proceedings by public authority and to civil proceedings by the victims of corruption. The argument that private law instruments may be used in order to achieve a public policy goal is not new and goes beyond the definition of "private enforcement" in the context of competition law. The idea of creating a favourable social and legal background to encourage the victims of anti-competitive practices can also be transposed to the fight against corruption. In fact, in many cases of corruption the low percentage of successful criminal persecution and the class of punishment associated with corruption offences do not represent a deterrent, considering the benefits deriving from bribe. This paper aims to address the question as to whether private law remedies under national legal systems could constitute an effective disincentive against corrupt practices, alongside criminal prosecutions. The case CIR vs. Fininvest, Lodo Mondadori is one of the first cases involving damages actions resulting from corrupt practices, and addresses two of the main obstacles to civil actions in this field: evidence and the quantification of damages.     

论解决内地与港澳法律冲突的区际协议方案

中央法律和特别行政区的地方法律处于平等地位，而且各法域没有一个共同的民商事立法机关，这些特点决定了区际实体法协议和区际冲突法协议是解决我国区际法律冲突的主要途径。区际协议的法律依据是基本法关于特别行政区高度自治权的规定。区际协议本质上不是任何形式的法律，因而在各法域内部没有直接适用的效力，无法对抗内地法与香港法、澳门法的规定，需要经过立法程序转化为内地的法律才能在内地法域范围内发生效力。     

从“抽象证明责任”到“具体举证责任”——德、日民事证据法研究的实践转向及其对我国的启示

德国、日本民事证据法研究的发展沿革及最新趋势显示,客观(抽象)证明责任的主导地位正在被能更好解释诉讼证明实践的具体举证责任概念所取代。这一趋势启示我国民事证据法的研究重心也应转移到以表见证明、摸索证明、事实推定、阐明义务、证明妨碍等制度为主要论题的具体举证责任领域,以这一理论指导司法实践以实现案件事实认定过程中的信息最大化与诉讼公正。     

论应当赋予侵权债权在破产分配中以优先地位

＂三鹿＂奶粉事件凸显在企业大规模侵权下在破产程序中赋予侵权债权普通债权人的地位具有不合理性。赋予侵权之债债权以普通债权的地位是对私法概念的曲解,违背了民商法公平正义的价值理念,不符合商法追求社会效益的价值诉求。基于此,应当赋予侵权之债在破产分配中以优先地位。     

香港民事诉讼中的诉讼费担保制度

诉讼费担保制度是普通法系国家的一项民事诉讼规则和制度,它能够解决一些因诉讼费而产生的不公平问题。在诉讼费担保制度的适用情形、担保金命令的申请程序、担保金命令的发出程序、担保金命令的法律效力、担保金的取回程序方面,香港都有比较完善的规定,但也存在一些需要解决的问题。香港诉讼费担保制度的成功之处对于阻止内地民事诉讼中的当事人滥诉行为,会有一定的借鉴意义。     

民法转型的法源缺陷：形式化、制定法优位及其校正

近代以来的民法典编纂促成了民法由综合整体法向一般私法的转型,推动了民法体系边界及对体系外有限开放性的形成,配合了民族国家形成及其与民法社会整体对应关系的建立,但也就此预埋风险。随着民法法源的形式化、法源中制定法优越地位的形成、对以商法为代表的传统多元社会法源的消解,民法的社会组织功能被削弱,国家借助特别民法等手段对民法的整体渗透日益不可量、不可控。危机的实质是,民法的体系化成就掩盖了自身的法源缺陷,反而损及私法自治这一现代民法自定义核心价值的实现。危机的根源是民法控权能力与民主自觉的丧失。民法法源的完善,应向正式宪法移交部分社会整合功能;通过将以商法为代表的亚社会法源渐进释出、拓展司法对社会问题与政治问题的解决途径等方法,提高民法的社会自组织能力,恢复民法对非官方公域的参与调整能力,实现通过民法的社会控制。在此基础上,民法教义学方能安全担当现代民法学的核心。     

简论民事诉讼当事人处分权

民事诉讼当事人处分权是导源于民事实体法中的私法自治原则 ,而又经过诉讼法公法性改造的程序性权利。它是由法律明文规定的 ,允许权利人通过诉讼程序行使的 ,以保护其民事实体权利和诉讼权利为目的 ,由国家司法审判权对其实施一定限制的工具性权利。当事人民事诉讼处分权的有无与大小 ,是识别不同民事诉讼模式的重要标准之一     

民事诉讼中的附属问题分析

民事诉讼中的附属问题是民事诉讼中对与诉讼相关的行政事实或证据判断问题,在诉讼中对它的认定和判断决定着民事案件性质或裁判结论。民事纠纷,会因行政权的介入而使问题变得复杂化。为了从根本上解决民事纠纷,保障当事人的权益,必须探讨新的制度来加以解决。     

裁判请求权保障与法院审判人员的优化配置

在实行法官员额制改革过程中,必须一并考虑法院审判人员的分类管理和优化配置问题。在民事诉讼中,为保障公民的裁判请求权,对于民事纠纷案件的审理,必须配置入额法官;对于非讼案件的审理、诉前或审前的法院调解以及立案登记等程序事项的处理应交由司法实务官进行,从而让法官专注于民事纠纷案件的审判,以更好地落实公民的裁判请求权保障之宪法理念。司法事务官不同于助理审判员,其不能审理所有的民事案件;司法事务官也不同于法官助理,司法事务官不是法官的助手,其可以依法独立行使职权。司法事务官不是宪法意义上的处理民事纠纷的法官,司法事务官不必进入法官员额。     

Similar Facts in Civil Cases

This essay evaluates the recent restatement in O’Brienv Chief Constable of South Wales Police of the law on similarfacts in civil proceedings. The two-stage approach propoundedin O’Brien contains a number of conceptual problems. Apparentsimplicity was achieved by avoiding fundamental issues underlyingthis area. Prior to the Criminal Justice Act 2003, judges recognizedthat the common law similar facts rule had a role to play inboth civil and criminal trials; but they gave the rule a widerexclusionary scope in criminal than in civil cases. Adoptionof a moral perspective helps to explain this state of affairs.The rule, so it will be argued, protects the legitimacy of trialdeliberation by forbidding reliance on an assumption that disrespectsthe moral autonomy of the person whose conduct is being judged.This moral objection can arise in civil cases; but it arisesmore frequently and usually with greater force in criminal proceedings.Hence, while there is a need to reserve some judicial powerto disallow proof of similar incidents in the civil context,there is usually less reason for the exercise of that powerin civil cases than at criminal trials.     

方法与目标:基本权利民法适用的两种考虑

基本权利既是主观权利,又是客观规范,具有第三人效力。将基本权利适用于民法,目的在于通过民法保护尚未被民法确立的基本权利。此种保护方法为"基本权利第三人间接效力说"。基本权利规范不宜直接作为民事判决依据,宜透过公序良俗、一般人格权等概括条款间接作为民事判决的说理依据。而通过民法保护并可作为民事裁判说理依据的基本权利有平等权、自由权、人格权及部分社会性基本权利。     

论以行为为标的的民事执行——以诉前停止侵犯知识产权裁定为基点

在解释论上,诉前停止侵犯知识产权的裁定经当事人申请后由作出裁定的审判机构执行,被申请人拒不履行的,适用妨害民事诉讼的强制措施。但是,从立法论的角度,此种裁定应当直接交付执行机构执行,既无需当事人申请,也不宜由审判机构执行。此种裁定的执行以行为为标的,妨害民事诉讼的强制措施并不能解决司法实践中存在的对行为义务的"执行难"问题。从制度上解决此问题的关键在于对间接执行方式的承认。     

Children's Participation in Family Law Proceedings: A Step Too Far or a Step Too Small?

The Children (Scotland) Act 1995 established children's rights to have their views considered in family law proceedings. These rights go further than elsewhere in the UK: in requiring parents to consult their children when making any ‘major decision’, in creating a range of mechanisms for children to state their views and through facilitating children becoming party to legal proceedings if they are legally competent. Such rights are not without controversy, either in abstract (Is it in children's best interests to be involved in court proceedings? Should children have such rights?) or in practice (Do children and parents know of these rights and accompanying duties? How do legal professionals judge a child's competency?). This paper explores such controversies, using findings from a feasibility study undertaken with children, parents and legal professionals.     

美国行政程序证据规则分析

美国行政程序证据规则独立于民事和刑事诉讼证据规则。1946年联邦行政程序法对行政程序证据规则作出原则规定,联邦法院一系列判例丰富和发展了行政程序证据规则。行政官员裁决案件不受联邦证据规则约束,不受传闻证据规则约束,但须符合实质证据规则的要求,受案卷排他原则约束。行政程序中提供证据是当事人的权利,也是当事人的责任,除法律另有规定外,任何证据都可接受。行政程序证明责任分配原则采用"谁主张谁举证"。     

The International Crimes Tribunal in Bangladesh and International Law

The International Crimes Tribunal in Bangladesh was re-established in 2010 in order to hold the perpetrators of the 1971 War accountable for international crimes; namely, war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. The Trial has already begum to operate and has been dealing with various challenges. The basis of the trial proceedings is the International Crimes (Tribunal) Act 1973. The Parliament of Bangladesh enacted the Act in accordance with international law shortly after the War. This paper assesses the key legal issues that arise from the context of the 1973 Act, and will provide a reflection on trial proceedings in light of international law. It concludes that any initiatives to address the impunity of perpetrators and offer redress to the victims of gross human rights violations should be applauded, while any trial proceedings that do not follow appropriate standards for a fair trial and offer the right of due process should be deprecated.     

第三人撤销之诉的原告适格

考察我国案外人申请再审的实践可以发现,我国法院并不接受判决效力相对性原则,不能以此为据反对引入第三人撤销之诉,更不能以此作为分析第三人撤销之诉原告适格的出发点。尽管立法者希望通过第三人撤销之诉规制虚假诉讼、恶意诉讼,但从制度自身的机理出发,将该制度的目的界定为"为受生效裁判不利影响的第三人提供实体救济"更妥当。以此为基点,在对待第三人撤销之诉的原告适格问题上,应以2012年民事诉讼法第56条第3款规定的必备要件为重点,对于第1、2款规定的前提性要件,则采相对宽容的审查标准。对于有独立请求权的第三人,可将原告适格的标准界定为"对当事人争议的诉讼标的主张实体权利的人";对于无独立请求权的第三人,则采相对宽松的一般标准,不适用最高人民法院针对通知参加诉讼第三人的限制性规定。考虑到理论的周延性,必要共同诉讼人不宜作为第三人撤销之诉的适格原告。至于受生效裁判不利影响的一般债权人,较稳健的做法是诉诸实体法,通过援引民法通则第58条、合同法第52条或者合同法第74条,赋予相关债权人第三人撤销之诉的原告适格。