我国公司法的可实施性刍论

我国2006年公司法增强了“可实施性”,部分解决了司法实践中长期困扰法律工作者的公司纠纷案件缺乏诉讼依据的问题。基于公司纠纷诉讼案件的特殊性,引发出调整和补正相关民事诉讼制度的必要性。同时仍然需要在立法和司法实践中逐步完善公司法的规定,进一步增强其可实施性,以最终完全激活公司法。     

论举证责任的不可转换性

举下责任问题在民事诉讼理论研究中占有重要地位。国内通行的举证责任转换理论模糊了举证责任的本来含义和法律性质，有必要在法理上进行澄清。举证责任虽有二重含义，但其本质含义应是客观举证责任，即指在作为裁判基础的某个事实真伪不明时，依照预先规定的裁判规范由当事人所承担一种责任。在民事诉讼中，举证责任是由案件的性质决定的；当案件的性质确定之后，举证责任即被确定，它在诉讼过程中是不可转换的。     

The Presumption of Proportionality

This article challenges the assumption that the burden of demonstrating that a limitation of a fundamental right is proportionate rests on the public authority seeking to justify the limitation. After considering the operation of burdens and presumptions in European human rights case‐law it notes the difficulties British domestic courts have had in rigorously applying proportionality tests. It suggests that the concerns which lead judges to weaken the requirement of proportionality would be better met by recognising that certain circumstances give rise to a presumption of proportionality, where the burden of demonstrating disproportionality rests on the right‐holder. Five categories of case in which this applies are proposed, and one which has recently been judicially accepted is rejected. Clarifying the types of case in which a presumption of proportionality applies is a preferable strategy to blurring the standards of justification to be met by those seeking to limit the enjoyment of rights.¹     

职场性骚扰与女性劳动者权益的法律保障

近年来,职场性骚扰日益成为一个严重的社会问题,不仅直接损害了女性的身心健康,而且从根本上威胁到了女性劳动者的人权.职场性骚扰是两性不平等的产物,它的存在反过来又强化了这种不平等.我国目前在处理职场性骚扰案件方面还存在诸多不足,应该以明确性骚扰概念为起点,建立完善的性骚扰处理机制,以有效应对职场性骚扰的不良影响,确实保护女性劳动者权益.     

论纳税人诚实推定权的入法途径

诚实推定权由纳税人财产权与人格尊严权衍生而来,在立法中加以确认有助于落实税收法定、践行量能课税和提高纳税人遵从度。诚实推定权借鉴了刑法上的无罪推定和民法上的善意推定,其基本内涵是税务机关认为纳税人有少缴税款嫌疑时,应由该机关承担举证责任,证明强度应达到优势证据标准。我国应在修改《税收征收管理法》时,明确表达纳税人享有诚实推定权,同时准确界分纳税人的协力义务和税务机关的举证责任,强调逃税行为必须具备主观故意的要件,合理限定税收检查权。诚实推定权入法将对税收征纳实践产生影响,提高现有“计税依据明显偏低”的认定标准,使纳税人的正当理由诉求更有可能被认可,对逃税行为的界定也将更为精确。     

Who wants to pay more? The European Union's military operations and the dispute over financial burden sharing

In 2014, the European Union (EU) launched the sixth review of the Athena mechanism that finances the common costs of military operations launched in the framework of its Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). In the run up to the review, there were expectations that it would improve financial burden sharing in CSDP operations by expanding common funding for them. However, these hopes were disappointed; the review became a diplomatic tug of war between France, the strongest supporter of expanded common funding, and the UK, its strongest opponent. In the end, France agreed to the UK's terms to ensure that the existing level of common funding would not decrease. This article analyses the Athena review from a neoclassical realist perspective. It argues that the review's outcome was due to the imbalance of influence among EU member states and the diverging preferences of their Foreign Policy Executives (FPEs). These factors caused the Athena review to remain in the hands of a small group of member states that had diverging utility expectations and ideological preferences. Thus, the article shows that a surprisingly intense burden-sharing dispute has emerged within CSDP.     

洗钱罪证据调查方法研究之一洗钱罪主观方面之证明

我国《刑法》及《反洗钱法》都规定了洗钱犯罪的主观方面须为“明知”,而如何证明洗钱犯罪嫌疑人的“明知”则是洗钱犯罪诉讼证明中的重要环节。但是,仅有嫌疑人的自认尚不足以完全证明其“明知”的存在,还需要有其他证据来予以补强。这可以通过利用间接证据或推定来获得。此外,利用举证责任倒置而确立嫌疑人的有限举证责任,并以此来证明洗钱罪的主观方面,也不失为一个值得考虑的做法。     

承运人主张免责情况下，适航义务举证责任问题研究

按照“谁主张 ,谁举证”原则和最低限度事实说 ,适航义务的举证责任应当由主张免责不能成立的索赔方承担 ;然而从程序公正的角度考虑 ,由承运人承担适航义务的举证责任又较为合理 ,这两者的矛盾是合法性与合理性的矛盾。既然将合法的东西变得合理较之将合理的东西变得合法要困难得多 ,本文建议尽快以立法的方式对这一问题予以解决。     

论原告在行政诉讼中举证责任的承担

按照我国现行法律规定,行政诉讼举证责任主要由被告承担,原告所承担的举证责任极为有限,这一规定具有一定的科学性与合理性;但过于笼统,缺乏可操作性。文章从举证责任的涵义入手,分析和阐述了原告在行政诉讼中应承担的举证责任,并结合审判实践,对在行政赔偿诉讼中原告举证若干问题进行了研究,以期实现司法效率和司法正义。     

CRITICAL THINKING ABOUT THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN CHINA’S FOOD SAFETY LAW

We are living in a risk society where people devised the Precautionary Principle in order to minimize the harm caused by risk ex ante. Compared to the previous Food Hygiene Law (FHL) and the 2009 Food Safety Law, the 2015 revised Chinese Food Safety Law (FSL) made a real breakthrough in the sense that it legitimates an important principle in food safety governance. Apart from laying down the fundamental importance of this principle in food safety regulations, the FSL 2015 also invented arrangements from different aspects in order to implement this principle. In other words, the FSL 2015’s incorporation of the Precautionary Principle in a very real sense marked a transition from a demonstrative preventive food safety management regime to a more effective precautionary regime. However, the Precautionary Principle needs to be adopted in a “precautionary” way since this principle has its own limitations and defects. Incautious application of the principle may create new risks. This article compares the European approach in implementing the Precautionary Principle, and examines China’s legal arrangements against negative impacts brought by the Precautionary Principle. Three perspectives are discussed: independence of scientific institutes; proportionality in risk management measures, and the shift of burden of proof for market authorization.