牛隐孢子虫和隐孢子虫病的研究进展

从牛隐孢子虫病的病原分类、内生发育史、体液免疫和细胞免疫、流行病学特点、诊断、防治等几方面阐述了牛隐孢子虫和隐孢子虫病的研究现状,总结了前人对牛隐孢子虫3个有效种的生物学特性研究的结果,为进一步了解牛隐孢子虫病的流行病学及有效防制该病提供了参考。     

从归因到归责:客观归责理论研究

客观归责理论是德国刑法学在因果关系理论基础上发展起来的学说,旨在解决客观上的可归责性问题。归因与归责的区别在于:归因是一个事实问题,通过因果关系理论解决;归责是一个评价问题,通过客观归责理论解决。客观归责理论所确立的有关规则,对犯罪构成的客观要素进行实质审查,从而使犯罪构成论更加合理化。我国有必要对客观归责理论加以借鉴。     

近期国内学术界对非政府组织研究综述

目前学术界对非政府组织的研究在概念界定方面,集中在包括剩余法在内的几种定义上;在非政府组织勃兴的深层动因方面,市场与政府的“双重失灵”,“市民社会”的知识话语体系,合法性建构,社会转型,可持续发展等是几个常见的视角;在非政府组织与国家的关系方面,着重探讨了导致两者合作或冲突的多种可能性;对于非政府组织在我国的发展定位问题,一些学者提出了对非政府组织不能期望过高、非政府组织本土化的观点。     

On the Tort of Negligence in Common Law Legal System

It is difficult for judicial practitioners to determine the liability of tort of negligence due to the fact that it has not been specially stipulated in the provisions of the Tort Liability Law or other civil laws and regulations in China. On the contrary, the principles of tort of negligence in common law legal system have been refined in judicial practice and provided the corresponding solution for determining the liability of tort of negligence. The author believes that the empirical research on the tort of negligence in common law legal system will help us to further strengthen the understanding and application of the Tort Liability Law in China. This article thus comprehensively surveys and researches the tort of negligence from the perspective of common law legal system.     

中国农村最低生活保障的现状、问题及其成因

经过近几年的发展，中国在推行农村最低生活保障制度上已取得了一定成果，但无论在制度建设还是在实践环节都还存在诸多问题，该文对这些问题的成因进行了分析。     

从客观归因到主观归责

在中国现行刑法的明文规定和犯罪构成四要件的解说体系下，对因果关系及刑事责任的确定应遵循从客观归因到主观归责的分析进路。所谓客观归因，即对因果关系的判断只是确定行为人承担刑事责任的客观基础，故采用“条件说”即能以最简捷方法予以解决，不需要引入见仁见智的各式规范判断学说；至于由此而导致的责任范围过于宽泛的问题，则可以通过对主观罪过的精确界定予以解决，在主客观相统一的更高层面最终解决对行为人是否归责的问题。     

What does it mean to suffer loss? Haxton v Philips Electronics

In Haxton v Philips Electronics the Court of Appeal considered whether a widow could recover the diminution in value of her dependency claim following the defendant's tortious reduction of her life expectancy. The note outlines the development of the common law, demonstrating that Haxton is novel but not unorthodox, and tests whether Haxton's principles can provide a sound foundation for future cases. Positing three hypothetical scenarios, it argues that the disparity in outcome, rather than indicating a lack of unifying principle, as was suggested in Jobling v Associated Dairies, may be explained by combining Austin's division between primary and secondary rights with Gardner and Stevens' contributions as to how they are protected. Restitutio in integrum requires consideration of the reasons and values underlying the right in question and these are discernible in the jurisprudence. The note also considers whether Haxton could have been decided on the basis that a defendant should not profit from its own wrongdoing.     

‘Factual causation’ and ‘scope of liability’: What's the difference?

According to a dominant view, for the negligent defendant to be held liable for the plaintiff's harm the plaintiff must establish first, that the breach was the ‘factual cause’ of the harm, and second, that the harm is within the ‘scope of liability’. On this view, factual causation is purely factual, while scope of liability is normative and non‐causal. This article accepts the basic two‐step approach, but argues that the distinction is overstated. A close analysis of the principles shows that factual causation may require value judgment, and that scope of liability often involves an assessment of the strength and nature of the causal connection between breach and harm.     

存疑不起诉规范适用的思考

存疑不起诉是我国不起诉制度中的一个重要组成部分，体现了疑罪从无的司法理念。在司法实践中存疑不起诉被滥用、误用的情况比较普遍，原因既有立法规定不健全、不完善等问题，也有办案人徇私、徇情的问题，而对证据审查判断的偏差，把握的不一致、不统一是导致存疑不起诉适用不规范的重要原因。存疑不起诉的正确适用对于保障人权、实现诉讼公正与效率的双重价值具有重要意义。为了更好地维护公平正义，正确履行检察职责，准确行使存疑不起诉权，本文对甘肃省检察机关2003年至2007年存疑不诉案件的数据进行了统计和分析，对典型个案进行了专项调查和研究，分析出全省检察机关五年来存疑不诉案件的特点，进而从立法、侦查、检察等环节总结了办理存疑不诉案件中存在的问题，多层面、多角度的进行了原因分析，针对存在的问题和原因提出了相应的解决对策，以期对提高办案质量、正确适用存疑不起诉有所裨益。     

刑法因果关系理论巡历与新思考

刑法因果关系是刑法理论研究中的一个复杂且对实践具有十分重要意义的问题。本文通过对大陆法系及英美法系的因果理论巡历及我国目前论争的焦点,即纠缠于“必然性”和“偶然性”等哲学迷障,提出自己的新思考,再现了因果关系研究思路不应当复杂化,以便益于指导司法实践,使刑法理念得到更科学的体现。