行政受益权研究

行政法上的受益权是指行政相对人依法通过行政主体的作为和不作为而获得各种权利和利益的权利。它是积极国家、给付行政模式下行政相对人的最重要的权利。受益权与传统生存权之间是交叉关系。受益权的外延极其宽泛,而这主要取决于受益权是一种融合的权利。以受益权作为行政给付的现代权利基础,有利于扩大受益对象和授受范围,拓宽国家与政府义务范围,拓展积极国家理念,并有利于给付行政模式的建构。     

知识产权制度的进路与出路:知识产权文化——以构建和谐社会为视角

知识产权文化是知识产权制度的积淀和升华,对知识产权制度运行中各种主体的利益冲突具有潜在的协调和平衡作用。知识产权文化与和谐社会具有共同的经济理性,而且其协调和平衡的社会功能与和谐社会追求的终极目标不谋而合,因而知识产权文化在构建和谐社会的进程中具有重要的地位。     

The 14/2006 law on human assisted reproduction techniques: scientific and ethical considerations]

The new Spanish Law on Artificial Human Reproduction Techniques is analyzed from the scientific, ethical and legal points of view, paying special attention to the preimplantational diagnosis and the experimental utilization of gametes and preembryos. Other items are also analyzed.     

The recovery of finger marks from soot-covered glass fire debris.

This study aimed to expand the scope of previous research by assessing the effectiveness of soot-removal techniques on glass from petrol-bomb debris using methods of 1% and 2% sodium hydroxide (NaOH) solutions, ultrasonic bath and vacuum suction. Of particular interest were the 1% and 2% NaOH solutions applied to the soot-covered surfaces. Petrol bombs containing petrol or a 50:50 mix of petrol and motor oil were exploded and the debris was collected for analysis. Favourable results were found to varying degrees using each of the soot-removal methods with the 1% and 2% NaOH wash solutions, being the most useful. The 2% NaOH solution also proved successful as a soak to loosen and remove heavy contamination of soot and accelerants without damaging the finger mark beneath. This study also found that recovery of finger marks in blood from beneath soot using the 2% NaOH solution was possible. Finger marks were also applied to glass bottles with plastic adhesive labels, and providing the fire damage is not too great marks were also retrievable. Results from this study lead to the conclusion that the NaOH wash solution is ideally suited for soot removal to reveal latent and blood-contaminated marks both within the laboratory and at crime scenes.     

To Wonderland Through the Looking-glass: Conceiving a Critical Legal Argument for Contractual Justice in the South African Law of Contract †

The aim of this paper is to identify the possible substructure (looking glass/es) of a critical legal argument for contractual justice (Wonderland) in the South African law of contract. South African contract law still fails, ten years after the constitutional transformation, to reflect the constitutional ideals of freedom, equality and human dignity in an acceptable manner. I argue that this disposition places a question mark over the legitimacy of contract law and marginalizes opportunities for the social change envisaged by the Constitution. The paper explores Duncan Kennedy’s Form and Substance-argument and indicates that the reluctance to accommodate these values may be attributable to the fact that the majority of role-players position themselves on the individualism/rules side of Kennedy’s continuum – a paradigm that perceives the law of contract as a body of positivistic rules to be applied neutrally and regardless of the social or socio-economic distortions its application may generate. In an attempt to move away from this traditional approach, the privileged paradigm is criticised. A typical CLS-approach is followed which employs sociology, psychological jurisprudence and game theory to criticise the law from outside the restrictive realms of law itself. Simultaneously, I attempt to illuminate the argument for a shift (step through the looking glass) to another paradigm. I conclude that our judiciary finds itself in a position similar to that of Plato’s prisoners in the cave and will not reach the point where they apply relevant (constitutional) values directly to contractual disputes. The State is thus responsible for infusing contract law with contractual justice, by implementing legislation to this effect in order to limit the hegemonic consequences of the judiciary’s obsession with freedom of contract and utopian rules, which fail in reality to further the ideal of justice. Paper presented at the Critical Legal Conference, 4 September 2004, London, UK. This paper is dedicated to the memory of the late Judge of Appeal, Mr. Justice P.J. Olivier. The paper is based on research conducted for the thesis in partial fulfilment of the degree LLD in the Faculty of Law at the University of Pretoria under the title ‘A critical legal argument for contractual justice in the South African law of contract.’ The degree supervisor is Professor Karin van Marle in the Department of Legal History, Comparative Law and Jurisprudence. The author wishes to thank the following persons for valuable deliberations and input: Karin van Marle, Graham Bradfield and Anashri Pillay. In addition, the author wishes to acknowledge and thank the University of Cape Town for financially supporting this research. †Paper presented at the Critical Legal Conference, 4 September 2004, London, UK. This paper is dedicated to the memory of the late Judge of Appeal, Mr. Justice P.J. Olivier. The paper is based on research conducted for the thesis in partial fulfilment of the degree LLD in the Faculty of Law at the University of Pretoria under the title ‘A critical legal argument for contractual justice in the South African law of contract.’ The degree supervisor is Professor Karin van Marle in the Department of Legal History, Comparative Law and Jurisprudence. The author wishes to thank the following persons for valuable deliberations and input: Karin van Marle, Graham Bradfield and Anashri Pillay. In addition, the author wishes to acknowledge and thank the University of Cape Town for financially supporting this research. apply relevant (constitutional) values directly to contractual disputes. The State is thus responsible for infusing contract law with contractual justice, by implementing legislation to this effect in order to limit the hegemonic consequences of the judiciary’s obsession with freedom of contract and utopian rules, which fail in reality to further the ideal of justice.     

环境权:一种新兴的现代人权

人权是最基本的权利,环境权来自人权。生存权位于人权的核心,而环境权作为一项基本人权是不可剥夺、不可放弃和替代的权利。如果没有环境权,传统人权体系中的生存权就不可能得到完善的保障。环境权源于生存权,但超越了生存权,因此它是一种新兴的现代人权。     

常人方法学理论探析

社会学理论总是试图清晰地描述并解释社会行动及由此产生的复杂的生活世界 ,在熟知的基础上达到真知。传统的结构功能主义范式在这方面建立了较为完整的分析框架 ;而 5 0年代产生于美国的常人方法学理论则对结构功能主义理论进行了全方位的批判 ,并在“权宜性行动”、“索引性”、“反身性”等概念基础上建立了独特的社会学理论和分析方法。常人方法学为我们提供了全新的研究路径 ,但是它并没有完成给自己赋予的使命。