民法总则民商主体界分的制度缺陷与完善思路

民法总则关于民商主体界分的整体制度设计因自然人与法人的不同而分别遵循了不同的逻辑标准，但都直接体现或隐含了“营利性目的”的内涵。民法总则民商主体界分制度在概念使用和标准贯彻上存在逻辑缺陷，进而导致实践中可能面临诸多难题。可行的完善思路是对商自然人的主体制度建构采取由基本法确立营业权和由单行法规定具体规则的方式；用“组织”作为主体概念统领“法人”和“非法人组织”；将商组织的具体制度纳入民法典专编或者商事基本法加以规定，并且在民商主体界分时采取法律判定与事实判定相结合的模式。     

What do forensic analysts consider relevant to their decision making?

In response to research demonstrating that irrelevant contextual information can bias forensic science analyses, authorities have increasingly urged laboratories to limit analysts' access to irrelevant and potentially biasing information (Dror and Cole (2010) [3]; National Academy of Sciences (2009) [18]; President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (2016) [22]; UK Forensic Science Regulator (2015) [26]). However, a great challenge in implementing this reform is determining which information is task-relevant and which is task-irrelevant. In the current study, we surveyed 183 forensic analysts to examine what they consider relevant versus irrelevant in their forensic analyses. Results revealed that analysts generally do not regard information regarding the suspect or victim as essential to their analytic tasks. However, there was significant variability among analysts within and between disciplines. Findings suggest that forensic science disciplines need to agree on what they regard as task-relevant before context management procedures can be properly implemented. The lack of consensus about what is relevant information not only leaves room for biasing information, but also reveals foundational gaps in what analysts consider crucial in forensic decision making.     

实质的犯罪概念比较研究

在刑法学、犯罪学等刑事法学理论体系中,研究犯罪概念具有十分重要的意义。对犯罪概念可以划分为两种类型:一种是实质的犯罪概念,另一种是规范的犯罪概念。在此基础上,文章对英美法系、大陆法系实质的犯罪概念进行了比较研究,指出从历史发展的角度来看,实质意义上的犯罪概念先于规范的犯罪概念,实质的犯罪概念的界定与统治阶级的犯罪观是密切联系在一起的,即有什么样的犯罪观便有与其相应的实质的犯罪概念。     

法、道德和软实力

软实力就是文化实力,代表了一个国家的综合实力,决定着一个国家的未来。软实力由观念文化所组成,内容丰富,但是其核心是法和道德的观念和知识。一个国家的软实力表现在法和道德的状况上。法和道德的基本精神是创造和谐,因此,具有普世的价值。     

差异与成因：两大法系消极公诉权之评析——兼及我国消极公诉权之完善

消极公诉权在公诉权理论中占有极为重要的地位 ,两大法系都对之作出了积极的肯定 ,并在立法上作出了相应的规定。但是 ,两大法系对消极公诉权的规定又显示出了巨大的差异 ,这种差异是由于两大法系在国家政治哲学、法律传统、诉讼理念等方面的区别而造成的。本文分析了两者的差异 ,并对我国消极公诉权的完善提出了意见     

论警察的法律意识

公安工作提供的是一种公共产品 ,它不具有竞争性和排他性。警察的法律意识和法律素质问题 ,已成为制约公安工作的重要因素 ,也是人民群众反映强烈的主要问题。我们可以运用社会学、心理学和法学的相关知识 ,对警务人员的法律意识进行重点分析 ,以引起相关部门的注意 ,使公安工作更趋合理和完善     

Reforming Chinese arbitration law and practices in the global economy

In the last 50 years Chinese arbitration law and practices has made significant contributions to the international commercial arbitration and strides to manage the rapidly increasing caseload associated with a period of amazing growth in economic interactions between Chinese and non-Chinese parties. In the global economy there are rooms for further improvement. The paper proposed some ideas on reforming the Chinese arbitration law and practices on the arbitration system regarding the ad hoc arbitration, panel system and tribunal jurisdiction, interim measures of protection, as well as standards for the judicial review on the arbitral awards.     

《中华人民共和国仲裁法》修改暨中国仲裁协会章程起草研究工作座谈会综述

国务院法制办于2006年4月18~20日在厦门主持召开了《仲裁法》修改暨中国仲裁协会章程起草研究工作座谈会。出席会议的有国务院法制办领导以及全国十几家仲裁机构的主要负责人等。与会代表围绕此次会议的两个主要议题积极发言,献计献策,最终形成了一个面向全国仲裁机构征求意见的《仲裁法》修改草案,并且初步完成了中国仲裁协会章程的起草工作,为进一步征求各方意见并最终成立协会做好了准备。     

涉外劳动纠纷中竞业禁止协议准据法之研究——以微软与Google纠纷案为视角

竞业禁止协议的准据法确定问题,直接决定着涉外民商事关系主体应承担的具体权利、义务和责任,尤其是由于此类协议在一定程度上限制了雇员的择业自由,适用不当极有可能演变为雇主不正当竞争的工具,故此各国立法对其的有效性均采取审慎态度,并按照所奉行的公共政策对其进行法律调整。     

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.