司法审查的标准与方法——以美国行政法为视角

为了保证行政官员守法,各国设计了复杂的司法审查机制并发展了相应的理论和学说.本文考察美国联邦法院在审查行政案件中发展的原则和方法--具体地说,就是对于不同类型的行政诉讼,司法审查究竟应该采取什么标准、严格到什么程度?对于这个问题,美国法院历年来积累了丰富的判例并发展了精深的理论.美国行政诉讼的司法经验表明,司法审查的适当力度和标准取决于诸多制度性因素,尤其是司法权和行政权的平衡.     

我国刑事诉讼中的证明标准是定罪标准

编辑提示:我国司法及实务界对刑事证明标准的认定从来就没有停止过争论,而采用何种认定标准涉及到刑事证据的基本原则和主要规范以及对证据的收集、审查、判断和运用规则。如死刑案件和普通刑事案件对证据的要求是否一致?证据收集到什么程度可以确定一件案件的基本事实?立案、移送审查起诉及提起公诉这些不同的诉讼阶段对证据的要求标准是否一致?组文以最近最高院会集其他部门下发的两个规范性文件《关于办理死刑案件审查判断证据若干问题的规定》及《关于办理刑事案件排除非法证据若干问题的规定》为切入点讨论了刑事证据认定中的若干问题,以期对刑事证据理论和司法实践有些许裨益。     

大学学术权力司法规制的国际比较及启示

对美国、德国及法国有关大学学术权力①司法规制实践的考察发现,这些国家通过对司法审查内容和标准上的技术性完善,实现了从程序性规制到实体性规制的焦点转换.转向实体性规制后,大学决策的程序和内容被纳入到司法审查的范围中,并从形式性审查扩张到实质性审查.各国在司法审查的强度上存在差异性.其中德国走的最远,“作答余地”使得大学决策中基于专业判断的实质内容受到实质性审查,而美国、法国司法审查的范围虽然也已从程序问题扩展到实体问题,但对实体问题中基于专业判断的实质内容仍坚守司法克制原则而予以尊重.我国法院在寻求和选择适当的司法审查模式时,除了要考量大学学术权力的特质外,理应对这一趋势作出积极回应.     

吴燕发诉长泰县工商行政管理局撤销公司变更登记决定案

本案涉及对工商行政管理机关公司登记行为如何进行司法审查的问题：公司登记机关对公司登记行为负何种责任呢?是形式审查还是实质审查责任?法院是否有义务对所涉民事权益作出判决?原告吴燕发是否具备原告资格?本文将围绕上述问题进行探析。     

《民事诉讼法》修改与调解协议的司法审查

对调解协议进行司法确认的程序是本次民事诉讼立法修改的重点领域之一。本文考察的问题包括:从诉讼法学理论和相关的程序规范来看,对调解协议的效力进行司法确认的程序可以具有什么样的性质?这种确认与当事人请求履行调解协议、请求变更、撤销调解协议或者请求确认调解协议无效而提起的诉讼以及其中包含的确认有何关系?当事人提起的与调解协议效力有关的诉讼都属于哪些诉讼类型、其诉讼标的是什么?不同类型的这些诉讼在实务中适用时可能会遇到什么样的问题?等等。在探究这些问题的基础上,本文对于民事诉讼立法如何就调解协议的司法审查加以规定也提出了建议。     

网络服务提供者的事前知识产权审查义务

虽然网络服务提供者在一般情况下不必对利用其网络服务公开传播的信息的知识产权合法性进行审查,但在有些情况下,网络服务提供者应当审查知识产权合法性。只有认真分析为什么一般不负事前审查义务,才能在司法实践中准确认定网络服务提供者在何种情况下应当在事前对信息进行合法性审查。围绕为什么不负事前审查义务,什么情况下要负事前审查义务和事前审查义务应当达到什么程度等基本问题,系统地梳理了网络服务提供者的事前知识产权审查义务。     

WTO与司法审查

司法审查是WTO法律框架中的重要内容 ,涉及法院的司法审查权、司法审查的标准和范围等一系列行政法学理论问题。鉴于目前学术界对这些问题尚存在较多误解 ,有必要通过研究和论证 ,准确把握WTO中司法审查的具体规则及其与我国司法审查制度之间的关系 ,以期推动我国司法审查制度的发展和完善。     

美国违宪审查基准理论初探

宪法是政治法,其具有浓厚的政治性格;加上宪法所具有的抽象性与不明确性,使司法违宪审查中经常面对政治上的争议事件和人民基本权利的争议事件,因此,常常引发法律与政治之间陷入紧张关系之中。那么美国联邦法院是如何把握介入这些争议的限度?其对政府其他分支进行违宪审查的基准是什么?本文整理美国违宪审查基准的理论,以期作为中国违宪审查制度建构的他山之石,同时也期许一种更规范化的宪法研究方法。     

扩大司法审查协议是与非

随着国际商事仲裁的发展,司法实践中出现了当事人通过仲裁协议要求扩大法院司法审查范围的案件,当事人对仲裁裁决的审查要求从原先的程序性事项发展到事实认定或法律适用的实体事项。对于这种状况,原则上应当认可当事人扩大司法审查的协议,但应当遵循只对法律问题审查的界限,并允许如公共政策和合同规定等抗辩。     

从行政法权利理论视角看行政不作为司法审查的完善

理想的司法审查应当兼具维护客观法秩序和保护主观权利的双重功能。但我国现行行政不作为司法审查只能回答已经进入审理阶段的合法性问题,存在明显的缺陷。本论文拟从司法审查和目前我国行政法研究的核心范畴入手,深入分析我国现行行政不作为司法审查的困境,提出造成该困局的深层次因素并进一步提出解决方案为将行政法学研究的核心重点由对行政行为的考察转移到对相对人及其权利的研究上,简言之即是从"行为"到"权利"的转变。     

The Schengen Law: A Challenge for Legal Accountability in the European Union

This article examines challenges for accountability arising from the development of the Schengen law within the framework of the European Union. Building upon the substantive body of research by other authors on general implications of the integration of the Schengen acquis , it focuses on recent developments after the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam and evaluates to what extent the European institutions have so far met the challenges for accountability stemming from the intergovernmental origin of the Schengen law. The article identifies various persisting deficiencies in the areas of transparency, institutional balance and judicial review and proposes specific actions, which should be addressed vigorously by the European institutions.     

Independence of the Court of Justice of the European Union: Unchecked Member States power after the Sharpston Affair

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is the apex of the EU legal order, and is the supreme arbiter of EU law. For decades, it has delivered judgments, collectively shaping European integration and ‘integration through law’. It has undoubtedly been an authoritative leader in entrenching a European judicial culture, and has benefited from the cardinal principle of judicial independence enshrined in the EU Treaties, which in turn, it has insisted on being upheld as regards national courts. Questions have rarely arisen, however, about judicial independence of the CJEU. The Sharpston Affair of 2020–2021 opened the door to questioning such judicial independence. Is the CJEU at the mercy of the Member States? If so, what are the consequences for the EU legal order? This article reflects on the judicial independence of the CJEU, and offers reflections on how it can be preserved in the future.     

Codification of Administrative Law: The US and the Union

Abstract: The US Administrative Procedures Act of 1946 was engendered by partisan political conflicts. Initially judicial review of administrative rule-making under the act was extremely deferent. In the course of the 1960s and 1970s the federal courts, basing themselves upon the unchanged language of the statute, created a new body of administrative law characterised by very great demands on the agencies and very intrusive judicial review. This transformation was fuelled by partisan realignments, fear of technocracy and desire for greater transparency and popular participation in government decision-making. Because these same forces are now active in relation to the Union, it may be anticipated that similar tendencies toward a demanding procedural law of rule-making and high levels of judicial review will be felt as Union administrative law develops.     

论“大民事”

我国法院系统关于取消经济审判庭的“大民事”改革 ,实际上是向公、私法严格分野的“小民事”的倒退。司法真要改革 ,就要确立官民合作、“民行 (政 )”相容、实事求是、公平和诚信的理念。适应市场经济及其法治要求的理念确立了 ,相应的法和司法制度设计问题也就迎刃而解了。     

Mutual Recognition in European Judicial Cooperation: A Step Too Far Too Soon? Case Study—the European Arrest Warrant

Abstract: The European arrest warrant (EAW) is the first and most striking example of the extensive judicial cooperation in criminal matters that is beginning to take place in the European Union. Replacing traditional extradition between EU member states, including the ten accession countries after May 2004, it will operate on the basis of mutual recognition of judicial decisions, thus taking extradition decisions out of the hands of politicians. It rests on the presumption that criminal justice systems are equivalent throughout the EU and that the rights of the defence, in particular, are safeguarded adequately and in a comparable way EU‐wide. However, before the EAW has even been implemented, a number of practical problems are beginning to emerge, in particular in relation to the protection of individual rights and legal certainty in the European judicial space. The way in which these problems are tackled will be a litmus test of the respect for fundamental rights across the EU in the field of justice and home affairs. This article highlights the problems inherent in the rapid development of the principle of mutual recognition and suggests ways in which these problems can be addressed allowing for full protection of fundamental rights within a fully functioning European area of freedom, security, and justice. The EAW will be used to illustrate the prominent features of the emerging landscape of judicial cooperation in criminal matters, providing as it does the most radical example of developments in this field so far and their implications for fundamental rights.     

欧共体法中的相称性原则

相称性原则是欧共体法中的一项一般法律原则。其适用范围不仅包括共同体措施 ,而且包括成员国国内措施 ;不仅适用于行政行为 ,也适用于立法行为。适当性、必需性和最小限制性是相称性原则的三个构成要素。相称性原则与从属原则既有密切联系 ,也有本质区别。就其功能而言 ,相称性原则是欧共体法院司法审查的基础 ,是支配共同体行使权能的原则 ,是建立内部市场的指导原则     

EU Citizenship and Political Identity: The Demos and Telos Problems

Citizenship is the cornerstone of a democratic polity. It has three dimensions: legal, civic and affiliative. Citizens constitute the polity's demos, which often coincides with a nation. European Union (EU) citizenship was introduced to enhance ‘European identity’ (Europeans’ sense of belonging to their political community). Yet such citizenship faces at least two problems. First: Is there a European demos? If so, what is the status of peoples (nations, demoi) in the Member States? The original European project aimed at ‘an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe.’ Second: Citizens are members of a political community; to what kind of polity do EU citizens belong? Does the EU substitute Member States, assume them or coexist alongside them? After an analytical exposition of the demos and telos problems, I will argue for a normative self‐understanding of the EU polity and citizenship, neither in national nor in federal but in analogical terms.     

欧洲一体化对英国国际私法的影响

随着 1973年英国步入欧洲共同体 ,英国国际私法不应再被孤立地看待 ,它与欧洲联盟统一国际私法及欧洲联盟成员国中的大陆法系国家的国际私法紧密地联系在一起。它们相互影响、相互渗透、相互作用、相互促进。作为欧洲联盟 15个成员国中仅有的两个普通法法系国家之一 ,而且是普通法发源地的英国 ,其国际私法受到了欧洲一体化空前的、巨大的影响。这种影响主要体现在 :推动了英国国际私法制定法的新发展 ;开拓了英国国际私法的新法源 ;创立了英国冲突法案件的新类型 ;提供了英国解决冲突案件的新方法     

Droit de l’Union Européenne et Médiation Linguistique

The Law of the European Union is multilingual and multijural. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the problems related to the use of several languages in the writing of European legal texts and to compare the interactions between law and language in the decision-making process at the executive and judicial levels. Finally, the study will focus on the contributions of translation as a linguistic mediation in the communication of the European message on the continent.     

法律发现的实证分析——以我国行政诉讼为重点

法律的发现主要指法官用来发现解决个案纠纷的法律规则而使用的法律方法。行政诉讼的特殊性决定了对法律发现进行研究有更为重要的意义。通过对我国行政诉讼法律发现的实践的考察,可以发现在传统的成文法观念下,实际上存在着广泛的法官具有创造性的发现法律的活动。通过对我国行政诉讼中法律发现实践的价值分析,又可发现,法律的发现实践不仅弥补了法律的空缺,深刻地反映了法律到底应该是什么,而且维护了行政的活力。也正因为如此,我们应当在正视法律发现的正当性的基础上,从多方面改革现行司法制度,促进法律发现的发展。