The Logic of Time in Law and Legal Expert Systems*

Abstract. Research on an expert system regarding unemployment insurance law has pointed to the difficulties of explicitly representing temporal relations. The question has been addressed in the artificial intelligence literature with respect to planning systems and linguistic analysis. The approaches adopted do not appear to be directly transposable to legal discourse. The problem seems so far to have escaped notice amongst researchers attempting to develop legal expert systems. The paper explores in a preliminary way how lawyers use temporal concepts. It is submitted that “legal time” only partly overlaps with real time. A sketch of a formalization of temporal relations in law, following J. F. Allen's approach, is presented.     

Rules, Principles, Algorithms and the Description of Legal Systems

Abstract .
Although the Hart/Dworkin debate has as much to do with Dworkin's affirmative theory of judicial discretion as with Hart's more comprehensive theory of law, the starting point was of course Dworkin's attempt to demolish the "model of rules," Hart's alleged analysis of legal systems as collections of conclusive reasons for specified legal consequences. The continuing relevance of this attack for the prospects for any theory of law is the subject of the present essay.     

法律救济的规则选择:财产规则、责任规则与卡梅框架的法律经济学重构

法律经济学上的"卡-梅框架",是从法益保护的效果模式出发,对法律规则做出的一个类型划分。其原初结构是以法益的转移自由和定价意愿为标准划分的"财产规则"、"责任规则"和"禁易规则"。通过引入法益的初始归属和限价方式两个新的划分标准,可以增添"管制规则"和"无为规则"两个新的类型,扩展和重构"卡-梅框架"的救济分类和规则结构。这五类规则构成了法律经济学上可供选择的一个"规则菜单"。一个社会在特定领域的规则选择,对应着国家权力干涉社会生活的不同程度,体现了法律背后的观念变化和权力博弈。对于法律救济规则分类与效率比较的理论研究,有助于深化对中国现行法律的学术理解和制度完善。     

中国刑事专家辅助人向专家证人的角色转变

中国的刑事专家辅助人具有既类似于律师又类似于鉴定人、证人的多重属性;围绕专家辅助人意见的性质,也形成了质证方式说、鉴定意见说、证人证言说等多种观点。角色定位上的混乱,不仅造成了独具特色的鉴定人与专家辅助人的双轨制,而且常常使专家辅助人意见的法庭采信陷入困境。从最高人民法院有关专家辅助人的新近规定看,专家辅助人的角色呈现出向专家证人转变的趋势。这种转变的核心要求,一是实现鉴定人和专家辅助人的诉讼地位平等,专家辅助人意见和鉴定意见在专家证言意义上的证据效力平等;二是使专家辅助人回归专家证人本色,将强加给专家辅助人的不合理的质证职责交还给律师、检察官;三是提高律师、检察官熟练运用交叉询问规则、对科学证据进行质证的能力,充分发挥法官的科学证据"守门人"作用,以适应事实认定科学化的需要。     

论鉴定人的法律地位及其责任机制

鉴定人的法律责任是司法鉴定制度的一个重要的组成部分。从比较法角度分析在英美法国家和大陆法国家鉴定人法律地位的两种基本样式及其特征 ,比较不同程序结构下鉴定人承担的法律义务和相应责任的性质及内容 ,从而对我国鉴定人责任机制进行宏观建构。     

公司法人格否认:从法条跃入实践

滥用公司人格的普遍性与严重性是我国公司法引入"公司法人格否认"规则的诱因,但是,国外公司法人格否认规则向来是在个案中适用的,因而该规则采用制定法形式的缺陷是显而易见的.为了克服这一缺陷,宜采用判例指导制度.同时,要密切关注公司法人格否认在中国实践中的特殊性,注意欺诈、资本严重不足和过度控制在公司法人格适用中的关键作用.在司法审判中,应谨慎适用这一规则.     

中华法系与世界主要法律体系——从法系到法律样式的学术史考察

法系论自穗积陈重提出伊始,就存在着对世界法律体系划分标准不一的困难。本文通过学术史的考察认为,以往的中华法系研究基本上没有跳出法系论的框架。事实上,中华法系研究不仅是印证法系论的个例,更孕育着比较法研究开新的学术价值。武树臣教授从中国法律研究中提炼出法律样式的学说,为重建中华法系和再造比较法的奠定了新的范式基础。     

Following Legal Rules: Visibility and Feasibility

This paper reflects on the idea of ‘visualization’ of legal rules as part of an account of rule following in action. Presenting an alternative to Van Schooten’s (Jurisprudence and communication. Deborah Charles, Liverpool, 2012) account of interpretation, I first distinguish between two modes of interpretation: rehearsing and discursive. I argue that the former is the more basic one, relating to our respecting sources, rather than noticing signs, in action. In other (Wittgensteinian) words, we have to understand how we take guidance from rules. This account can profit from an analysis of what ‘seeing’ amounts to. Taking my cue from Merleau-Ponty, I point to the intertwinement between agent and world in seeing, in rule-following, and eventually in legal rule-following. The proof of the pudding is an alternative account of the time-honoured paradigm of legal interpretation: Hart’s ‘no vehicles in the park’. I show how this example is predicated on detecting ‘depth-clues’ in a rule, which allow an agent to correlate his vantage point to a vanishing point of a rule. The example illustrates a key-feature of rule following: reflexivity. I cannot follow a rule unless I project myself into its picture.     

两大法系非法证据排除规则比较研究

排除非法证据是保障被告人人权,维护司法公正的一项重要原则。由于法律文化传统的不同以及特定时期控制犯罪与保护人权的需要,不同法系之间以及同一法系不同国家之间有关这一问题的诉讼理论和具体对策往往存在着许多差异。对两大法系非法证据排除规则的发展历史及有关法律规定进行了比较和研究,目的在于为确立我国的非法证据排除规则提供借鉴。     

教材写作及东西方著作权法有关规定之比较

纵观世界各国的著作权法,不外以下功能,一是通过保护作者因创作作品而产生的财产权和人身权,鼓励作者的创作积极性;二是通过鼓励优秀作品的交流、传播,促进科学和文化的发展,最终起到提高全社会文化素质,尤其是推动社会教育事业发展的作用.但作者对其作品享有著作权,与公众享有受教育、获取知识和了解世界的权利在一定意义上却又是一对矛盾.     

损伤程度评定及其相关的法律问题

损伤程度评定是临床法医学鉴定的重要内容。本文从法学和医学角度,探讨了损伤程度评定的基本原则、损伤程度因果关系的判定、损伤程度评定时机、多部位损伤的损伤程度评定,以及损伤程度与法律责任关系等。     

从部分民事法律制度看法律的目的与效果

任何一项法律制度的设计都在于维护一定的权利、实现一定的目的。但是，很多具体制度在实际运用过程中，出现了“实然不及应然”的结果，令这些制度在价值方面大打折扣。究其原因，除了这些制度在设计时就存在一定的缺陷外，相关法律制度不够配套，也是原因之一。在我国现阶段，很多法律制度是积极的、进步的，但实施效果却不够理想，如何对其进行必要的补救，以形成目的与效果的统一，是立法的当务之急。     

民间金融的法律评判及规制路径

民间金融的存在和发展具有其应然合法性和实然合法性。倘若脱离民间金融所生存和发展的具体语境,单纯从国家法一元化视角出发去讨论民间金融的合法或者非法,都是有失偏颇的。从国家法与民间法二元结构体系看,那些在国家法层面被认定为非法的民间金融活动,在民间法层面并不当然丧失其合法性。因此,对民间金融必须立足于国家法与民间法二元结构的分析视角来加以考察,并通过适当的制度选择实现对其发展的规制和引导,而不是不加区别地一律予以打压和限制。     

Principles, Values, and Rules in Legal Decision-Making and the Dimensions of Legal Rationality

Abstract. The author singles out various conceptions of rationality used in practical legal discourse: formal and substantive rationality, instrumental goal- and means-rationality, communicative rationality. Practical rationality is expressed in decisions justified by epistemic and axiological premises according to the rules of justificatory reasoning. Five levels of analysis of this justification are identified. Rules, principles and evaluations are used as justifying arguments and their characteristics determine the dimensions of rationality of decision depending on the features of rules, various conceptions of principles, and kinds of relativisation of evaluations. The dimensions of legal rationality depend mainly on three singled out conceptions of rationality, i.e., formal rationality dealing with the deep structure of justification, instrumentally oriented rationality as content of justifiability, and communicative rationality linked with the pragmatics of human interaction. Legitimacy, according to the presented analysis, appears as a subclass of external justification dealing with axiological premisses in terms of instrumental rationality and/or communicative rationality.     

Automating the legal Reasoning Process: A Computer That Uses Regulations and Statutes to Draft Legal Documents

Several years ago, the American Bar Foundation initiated a modest investigation into the feasibility of designing a computer that could automate the assembly of form legal documents such as wills, trusts, complaints, and the like. The investigation has since matured into a major research effort to design an entirely new kind of computational processor. A prototype processor has now been constructed, and it is undergoing field tests to determine whether it truly fulfills the specialized needs of the legal drafter. This article briefly traces the history of the project, explaining the motivation behind it and describing the role of the participants. The article then introduces a new language—the principal result of the research effort—that may be used to draft both form documents and statutes, regulations, and other “instructions” defining how form documents are to be assembled. The new language, a subset of English, is fully comprehensible both to attorneys and to a properly designed computational processor. An attorney or paraprofessional may redraft form legal documents, statutes, and regulations in the new language and then feed them directly into the computer; no conventional programming is required. The computer asks questions couched in language taken from the forms and statutes, performs any necessary computations, and draws any necessary legal conclusions. The computer then returns client-customized legal documents ready for court filing. The article tells how the new processor may be set up to perform even the most complex drafting tasks—even complex tax-return preparation. Particular emphasis is placed on having the computer force the attorney or paraprofessional to proceed in a highly organized fashion with the development of a complex delivery system so that the computer, and not the attorney or paraprofessional, keeps track of the complex linkages between the elements of the system as it evolves. In its concluding section, the article explores the possible impact of this new technology upon the legal profession and the public, and the author expresses his view that centralized systems set up by legal specialists to support the work of numerous nonspecialists may expand the areas in which the generalist may do competent work and may enable the general practitioner to buck the current trend toward specialization.     

美国关于跨国并购的反补贴法律规制及我国的应对措施

随着我国“走出去”战略的深度发展,近年来我国企业跨国并购发展迅猛.我国企业跨国并购主要发生地之一的美国已经建立起了跨国并购反补贴法律规制,且深层次上缘于对我国经济发展和跨国并购的目的疑虑,故对我国企业跨国并购实行严苛的审查,拒绝所谓的基于政府补贴的跨国并购.我国应完善跨国并购反补贴法律制度,在拟出台的《外国投资法》和将来签订的自由贸易协定中纳入跨国并购反补贴条款,并完善我国企业跨国并购的补贴和融资政策.     

关于法律援助案件质量评估工作的几点思考

为切实加强法律援助案件质量监管,提高案件质量,近年,我国各地法律援助管理机关和法律援助机构强化了对法律援助人员的教育培训,严肃了工作纪律;明确援助人员的权利义务,完善援助案件指派手续;对重大案件进行研究讨论,定期和不定期对援助案件质量进行跟踪与检查,在援助案件办结后对当事人及时进行回访;等等。由于采取了上述一系列案件质量监管措施,有效地保障了法律援助案件质量,产生了良好的法律与社会效果。     

法律援助案件质量评估调研报告

为探索建立法律援助案件质量评估体系,推动提高法律援助办案质量,司法部法律援助中心今年组织开展了全国范围内的法律援助案件质量评估工作调研。现将调研的情况、存在的问题和我们对如何启动案件质量评估工作、构建适合我国国情的法律援助案件质量评估体系的建议报告如下。