婚内侵权问题研究

婚姻关系是我们生活中很重要的一种法律关系,然而随着经济社会发展的复杂化,婚姻中的侵权问题也日益凸显。本文通过分析婚内侵权问题产生的原因,提出其具体的解决方案,旨在减少或避免此类问题的发生,为被害方寻求更好的救济。     

婚内强奸定性研究－婚内强奸在我国应构成强奸罪

婚内强奸是古今中外都存在的客观社会现象.在父权制社会中,妻子在性生活中仅是丈夫性行为的客体,毫无性权利可言.因此西方刑法认为婚内强奸不构成强奸罪.随着女性的逐步解放与独立,从尊重女性的性自主权出发,在刑法典中肯定婚内强奸,目前在西方已渐成潮流.当前我国刑法学界对婚内强奸基本上持否定态度.本文认为婚内强奸构成强奸罪有其充足的刑法学理由;当前如果发生婚内强奸案件,可以对行为人直接以强奸罪论处;婚内强奸案件有其特殊性,需要进一步加以立法完善.     

婚内强奸之我见

古人云:齐家、治国、平天下。又歌者曰家和万事兴。这皆说明旷古溯今,家的盛衰是决定国泰民安、万事诸顺的重要因素。而一个完整的家由血亲和婚姻构成,现暂不论血亲这个因素,婚姻稳定性俨然成为决定家庭盛衰甚至国家兴亡的主要因素之一,何况婚姻的礼法也一贯是老百姓最重视的风土民情之一。若想要维系婚姻的健康发展,长久的稳定,对处于当代社会在性别歧视方面虽有很大改观,但仍以男性为尊的大环境中,把对女性的尊重和对女权的保护提升到特殊的高度显得尤为必要与重要。近年来,随着女性社会地位的攀升,婚内强奸这个字眼也不断跳入了人们的视野。对于婚内强奸是否入罪无论是理论界还是实务界众说纷纭,莫衷一是。本文就此的个人见解予以阐述。     

婚内强奸之我见

对于婚内强奸是否能构成犯罪这个问题,可谓众说纷纭,有认可的、有反对的也有折中的。本文的笔者觉得中间说里的时间说最为可取。但是它也并非完美无缺,在特殊时间段的划分等方面还需要进一步完善,我国关于婚内强奸的立法也存在着巨大的调整空间,本文后面部分将针对这些问题一一提出解决建议。     

婚内人身损害赔偿问题研究

现行法律制度无法提供非离婚条件下配偶间民事损害赔偿救济,从而置家庭暴力受害者于尴尬境地,应当加以解决。本文剖析了导致婚内损害赔偿受阻的立法,司法解释等法律症结,厘清了婚内人身损害赔偿制度与家庭财产制度及离婚损害赔偿制度之间的关系,提出了增加非常财产制度、修改有关司法解释等解决婚内损害赔偿问题的具体思路。     

婚内有无强奸──评“婚内无奸”

婚内存否强奸 ,一直是刑法学争议的问题。最近 ,上海市青浦区人民法院对一起离婚诉讼中丈夫违背妻子的意志用暴力手段强行与妻子进行性行为的案件作出了丈夫构成强奸罪的判决。它又一次引发了对这一问题的争论。为此 ,本社组织了一组笔谈。     

浅析婚内损害赔偿制度

2001年新修改的《婚姻法》确立了我国的婚姻损害赔偿制度,但确立的仅仅是指离婚损害赔偿,并不包括婚内损害赔偿制度。从我国现行的婚姻状况来看,家庭暴力、虐待、遗弃、重婚及有配偶者与他人同居等婚内侵权损害的事件不断增加,笔者通过婚内损害赔偿概念及构成对婚内损害赔偿制度进行简介,探讨了建立婚内损害赔偿制度的理论和法律依据,并进一步分析了婚内损害赔偿制度的效力及内容和意义。     

婚内强奸立法探析

一、问题的提出 “婚内强奸”一直是一个相当敏感的话题。较早的一起婚内强奸案发生在陕西:丈夫不顾妻子的反对,公然在室外与妻子强行发生性关系,被以强奸罪论处。上海青浦区人民法院也判决了当地首例婚内强奸案:王某在起诉离婚、判决尚未生效之前,强行和妻子发生性关系,法院以强奸罪判处其有期徒刑三年,缓刑三年。但极为相似的案例,在四川省南江县却是截然相反的结局:丈夫被判无罪,婚内强奸不成立。对此,法学界和司法界开展了诸多讨论:是否应将“婚内强奸”设定为犯罪,明文写入法律当中?     

婚内侵权问题浅析

由于夫妻彼此的交往和联系比任何人都更为持久、密切,因此,夫或妻更易受到来自对方的侵害。法律对一般侵权行为有系统全面的规定,但针对婚姻关系存续期间的侵权现象缺乏具体规定,导致婚姻关系中受侵害方的合法权益无法保障。本文指出为给婚姻关系的当事人提供一个更有效的法律救济途径,就需要建立婚内侵权损害赔偿的相关制度,这是保护配偶权及维护家庭稳定的需要。     

婚内“裸捐”

爱上你落寞身影 “裸捐协议”见证爱情 认识齐静之前．徐建有过一段不幸的婚姻，10年前，前妻生下儿子徐风哲后不幸去世。之后，亲戚朋友给他介绍过好几个对象，可徐建怕儿子受委屈，一直没同意．直到在公司的年终酒会上遇到了齐静．那时徐建32岁，齐静30岁。酒会上齐静落寞的身影深深地吸引了徐建，他从朋友嘴里得知，齐静也是离异之人，目前住在其父母家。     

中国区际同居关系法律问题研究

中国婚姻家庭领域中内地人与港、澳、台人之间的同居关系,由此所引起的危害性后果及其他法域政策的改变不容忽视。对中国四法域相关的法律﹑判例比较分析可知,四法域对同居关系的法律态度:差异是主要的,但也存在共性,且三法域的法律、判例与中国大陆相比有其特色。解决中国区际同居关系法律问题的设想:中国区际未婚同居关系法律冲突,可运用"直接适用的法"解决;中国区际婚外同居关系民事责任法律冲突,应当允许受案法官根据个案自由裁量;中国区际婚外同居关系刑事责任法律问题的解决,应对相关的法律或司法解释作修改。     

Cohabitation and Comparative Method

The paper intervenes in current policy debates on unmarried cohabitation and comparative law debates on methodology. It adopts a culturally alert, discursive methodology of comparison to study regulation of unmarried cohabitation under the common law and civil law as well as the effect of an entrenched right to equality protecting against marital status discrimination. It identifies not different legislative solutions to a common problem, but distinct discourses of family law regulation. Yet the approaches are less radically opposed than is often thought. Discursive comparison tends to highlight dominant voices at the expense of minority ones, wrongly characterising minority views as foreign to a tradition. Discursive comparison should not confine itself to a synchronic view of present legal debates; a richer diachronic approach will also attend to views within a legal tradition's past.     

协议同居的法制思考

婚姻家庭形式是人类社会历史和社会经济文化发展的一个缩影。我国自1978年改革开放以来，人们的思想经历了巨大的解放，婚姻家庭形式也经历了一个巨大的变革时期。除去以往的传统婚姻形式之外，协议同居的情况愈发普遍，正不可回避地冲击着传统婚姻道德观念和既有调整婚姻家庭的法律制度。以深圳为例：一份社会学者对深圳市民所做的调查表明，64％的被调查对象对协议同居持肯定态度，其中，认为有了爱就可以同居的占22．8％，认为恋爱关系确定了就可以同居的占41．2％，对协议同居持否定态度的占36％。而据学者1998年8月至2000年8月在我国对婚前性行为的全国抽样调查显示，分别有33．4％的男性被调查者和17．5％的女性被调查者承认在登记结婚前曾有过性生活。     

Regulation of Cohabitation and Marriage in Canada

Marriage in Canada had lost much of its legal significance because of the extension of many of the incidents of marriage to unmarried cohabitants of the same or opposite sex. This process has resulted in large part from decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or marital status is constitutionally impermissible. In a decision that seemed to many a surprising reversal of this trend, the Supreme Court of Canada in 2002 ruled that legislators could constitutionally exclude unmarried couples from family property laws. The effect of this decision has been to revive the legal significance of marriage. At the same time, courts have resurrected the social significance of marriage by accepting the argument of same-sex marriage advocates that a "separate but equal" civil union institution would not respect the constitutional guarantee of equality and by endorsing the constitutional right of same-sex couples to the symbolic value of marriage as a public and legal celebration of a relationship. Same-sex marriages may now be legally celebrated in three Canadian provinces, and the federal government has made a commitment to open up civil marriage to same-sex couples across the country. While some same-sex couples and unmarried cohabitants have fought for spousal or marital status, others have sought to avoid the burdens associated with spousal status. After the same-sex marriage debate is concluded, Canada will be ready to move on to consider whether all of the legal privileges and burdens now assigned to those in conjugal relationships, whether married, unmarried, same-sex or opposite-sex, can be justified.     

Unmarried Cohabitation and Parenthood in Britain and Europe

This paper focuses on cohabitation and unmarried parenthood across a range of European nations. It includes a brief outline of the history of cohabitation, reviews recent trends in cohabitation and unmarried parenthood, compares the stability of marital and cohabiting unions, examines the extent to which cohabiting couples are regarded as families, and the final sections include a review of the policy responses to date, as well as a discussion of the impetuses that may lie behind the rise in cohabitation and unmarried parenthood.     

Cohabitation,female sacrifice,and judge-made law

This paper shares results of a study of judgments applying the common law as adapted to the cohabitation context. Specifically, the Supreme Court of Canada has held that couples who formed a ‘joint family venture’ may need to share the wealth gained during cohabitation. The study compares the couples leading to positive and negative findings of a joint family venture. Positive findings correlate with traditional markers of family and economic integration, such as joint bank accounts and the presence of children. Despite the discourse of family diversity, gendered patterns run across all the couples, with women assuming primary care of children, shouldering domestic labour, and making career sacrifices for the family. In a sign of the limits of judge-made reforms, the doctrine may be harder for some claimants to access than for others, in ways not necessarily tracking commitment and economic integration.     

Legal Treatment of Cohabitation in the United States*

This article discusses the variety of ways state legal systems in the United States treat cohabitation, both by same-sex and heterosexual couples. The different approaches are described along a spectrum that ranges from one extreme, under which cohabitants have essentially no rights against one another or against third parties, to the other extreme, under which cohabitants are to be treated as though they were married under state law. Different areas of law are discussed, including the rights of cohabitants both against one another (remedies upon dissolution, inheritance) and against third parties, such as state benefits, tort claims, health-related benefits, and rights concerning children. The article concludes with speculations concerning why the remedies offered to cohabitants in the United States are so limited, as compared with other countries.