The Concept of Appropriation and The Offence of Theft

The English law of theft is confusing and problematic in principle. Since the introduction of the Theft Act 1968 there has been inconsistency in the interpretation of appropriation as court and commentators have grappled with the intuition that appropriation must entail some subjective element and cannot be purely objective. Although subjectivity is traditionally associated with culpability rather than with conduct, it is argued that some acts can be subjective and yet factual and stand as causes to effects. Appropriation is such an act, its necessary and sufficient condition being a mindset, here termed proprietary subjectivity, on the part of the actor. It is argued that clarification of the concept of appropriation can help to resolve misperceived problems. Such clarification will also reveal other problems in the law of theft. Some tentative comments de lege ferenda are made suggesting how these problems can be addressed.     

抵押与质押之区分及中国物权法的选择

关于抵押与质押之区分 ,大陆法系主要有三种立法例。我国对抵押与质押关系的处理经历了由《民法通则》的“质”“押”合一到《担保法》的“质”“押”分立的变迁。《担保法》中采取多元化的标准区分抵押与质押 ,担保标的不同 ,抵押与质押的区分标准也各不相同 ,这就造成了若干理论上的困惑和一些实践中的不便。为此 ,有必要以民法典的编撰和物权法的制定为契机 ,对抵押与质押的区分进行重新思考和抉择 ,选取占有方式作为二者区分的标准     

诉讼欺诈行为研究——以刑法为视角的分析

诉讼欺诈是一种独特的危害社会的行为。我国刑法理论和司法实践对诉讼欺诈行为的定性分歧较大。事实上,诉讼欺诈完全符合诈骗罪的本质特征,因而应按诈骗罪定罪量刑。诉讼欺诈行为侵犯双重具体的社会关系,但其直接客体是单一客体。诈骗罪中的被骗人与被害人不必是同一人,但被骗人与财产处分者必须是同一人;在被骗人与被害人不一致的情况下,应当以被骗人为基准来判断处分意思和处分行为。     

Competitive Liberalization,Competitive Imperialism,and Intellectual Property

Aggressive pursuit of free trade agreements (FTAs) and customs unions (CUs) by major and minor trading powers alike challenges the conventional wisdom in favor of such pursuit – competitive liberalization. An equally plausible explanation for an active bilateral and regional trade agreement policy, one which effectively de-emphasizes multilateralism, may be competitive imperialism. The protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights is one area in which new provisions, going beyond multilateral rules, are being negotiated and written into FTAs and CUs. Such provisions may yield insights into which characterization of bilateralism and regionalism – competitive liberalization or competitive imperialism – is more apt. Rice Distinguished Professor, The University of Kansas, School of Law, Green Hall, 1535 West 15th Street, Lawrence, KS 66045-7577, USA. Tel. +1-785-8649224. Fax. +1-785-8645054. www.law.ku.edu. J.D., Harvard (1989); M.Sc., Oxford (1986); M.Sc., London School of Economics (1985); A.B., Duke (1984). Marshall Scholar (1984-86). Member, Council on Foreign Relations, Royal Society for Asian Affairs, and Fellowship of Catholic Scholars. Author, Modern GATT Law (Sweet & Maxwell 2005), International Trade Law: Theory and Practice (2nd ed. 2000, 3rd ed. forthcoming 2007-08), and Trade, Development, and Social Justice (Carolina Academic Press 2003). I am thankful to my Research Assistant, Mr. David R. Jackson (B.A., George Mason University, 1992; J.D. Class of 2007, University of Kansas), for his indispensable help on this work. I also am grateful to Dr. Mohammed El Said, University of Central Lancashire (UCLAN), for his consistent support and friendship, and for what he has taught and continues to teach me about international trade and intellectual property.     

论我国知识产权《刑法》保护体系的完善

目前,知识经济正在逐渐成为世界经济的主导,知识成为重要的资源,知识产权作为产权的一种特殊形式,作为一种宝贵的财富在世界范围内得到了承认和保护。构筑完备的知识产权法律保护体系,对严重的侵权行为用刑罚加以控制的观念正在为人们所接受。但随着我国知识产权专门立法的发展和我国知识产权执法环境的变化,这种知识产权的《刑法》保护力度还显得不足,需要进一步完善。     

家族企业产权制度变迁路径

国内外家族企业发展的历史证明,产权的逐渐多元化和社会化是必然趋势。单一的产权结构不仅限制了家族企业筹集资金的能力,而且限制了家族企业的人才结构,无法满足企业扩展的要求。因此,对于处在扩张阶段的我国家族企业而言,必须突破产权关,实现家族企业的产权变迁。     

论遗产分割中的归扣制度

本文认为,中国传统税法研究过于强调税收的“权力性、强制性与无偿性”,因而使税法异化为侵犯(私人)财产权的“侵权法”,与作为“维权法”的私法形成对立。然而,从依法治国之宪法意旨和市场经济的内在要求来看,税法与私法本质上应为统一,并具有内在、广泛的联系,其本源就在于“对(私人)财产权的确认和保障”。     

论农村土地资产与土地资本的协调与转化

长期以来,我国只将土地作为一种生存的工具,称之为生产资料。经过30年的土地制度变迁,土地才由生产资料变成土地资产,又过了20年土地才具有了部分生产要素性质。从实践来看,土地制度变迁的最终目的应该是将土地资产变成土地资本。     

浅析破坏生产经营罪

破坏生产经营罪本身的构成要件含糊不明,加之为顺应我国经济体制的变化,使法律适应客观形式的发展,1997年刑法将破坏集体生产罪修改为破坏生产经营罪,并对之进行体系结构归属调整。但也为此使刑法学者对破坏生产经营罪产生诸多争议。如此罪侵犯的客体是单一客体,还是复杂客体。特别是此罪容易与其他相关犯罪混淆,给司法实践带来不便。通过重新界定生产经营的内涵、犯罪的目的等,对其进行合理的限制解释,并将其与一些极易混淆的犯罪加以比较,进一步明确此罪。