行政裁量与判断过程审查方式

本文以探究行政裁量的司法审查方式为目的,结合我国的判例材料,对日本的判断过程审查方式进行考察.判断过程审查方式立足于行政裁量等于法律的程序性实体拘束这一行政裁量观念(发展了的裁量一元论),对行政裁量进行程序性实体审查.它作为行政裁量问题的大陆法范武,对我国构建行政裁量论具有重要的参考意义.     

论酌定不起诉的实体依据

不起诉从表面看是刑事诉讼机制,但其背后的依据却不仅仅是诉讼原理,更多的是实体法内容。刑罚个别化、刑法“并合主义”刑罚论、相对罪刑法定原则、刑事政策四个方面均与酌定不起诉关系密切,这也是“刑事一体化”的最好体现。     

The UK 'non-dom' and non-resident trusts

The Commissioners decision in the recently reported case ofRobert Gaines-Cooper (SpC 568) has raised some interesting pointsfor tax practitioners and their clients. Momentarily, it hasbrought to public scrutiny the predicament of a citizen bornin the UK, who chose to live for significant periods abroadbut spent the rest of his time in the UK; and who, by so doing,wrongly (in the eyes of HMRC and the Special Commissioners)considered himself to be non-resident and non-domiciled forUK tax purposes, a mistake with significant and adverse taxconsequences for him. Whilst of immediate concern to tax practitioners,should this decision be of equal concern to trust practitionersadvising on the potential     

Congress' rules for foreign trusts reporting: no more Mr Nice Guy

The current US rules on the obligation to report on the formationof a foreign trust and the consequences of failing to do soare complex. This article outlines the main precautions thatshould be taken by those advising US clients.     

Taxation of non-resident trusts in Canada and taxation of Canadian beneficiaries of non-resident trusts qualified as foreign investment entities

As a general rule, non-resident trusts are not subject to taxin Canada and distributions from Canadian non-resident trustsare not subject to tax in the hands of the Canadian beneficiaries.However, there are exceptions. The purpose of this article isto focus on the new conditions under which a non-resident trustcould be subject to tax in Canada or treated as a foreign investmententity for tax purposes which triggers a Canadian tax liabilityfor the beneficiary.     

从裁量二元论到裁量一元论

裁量二元论长期以来是行政法领域中的支配性理论,它把裁量问题与法律问题作为各自独立的二元来理解;裁量一元论正好相反,它认为裁量问题与法律问题并非各自独立的二元,根本不存在不受法律拘束的自由裁量。裁量一元论自20世纪中期以来,随着大陆法系国家法院对行政裁量态度的转变而逐渐抬头;20世纪后期以来,更有取代裁量二元论之势。这一现象意味着大陆法系国家行政裁量观念发生了质变,其直接原因是“裁量滥用”法理的展开,更深层次的原因则是是法治国家理念的质变。     

The last frontier: enforcing foreign judgments against offshore trusts after Pattni v Ali

A review of recent case law outlining the approach to enforcingforeign judgments in some common law jurisdictions. The cases,which were all decided over the last three years, in or on appealfrom, the Isle of Man, Jersey and the Cayman Islands, dealtwith orders for the transfer of shareholdings in companies incorporatedin the respective jurisdictions. It is the raison d'etre ofthe offshore trusts industry in each of those jurisdictionsthat they have each sought to put in place, some later thanothers, legislative packages which advertise certainty aboutthe circumstances in which foreign judgments will or will notbe enforced.     

Jersey trusts and foreign divorce proceedings: The H Trust (2007) JRC 187

This is a second and important judgment in the H Trust litigation,which was first before the Royal Court in April 2006. At thathearing, the Royal Court directed the Jersey resident trusteeof the H Trust not to take any part in English divorce proceedingsbetween a husband and wife, both of whom were beneficiariesunder the H Trust, but to provide full information to the partiesfor use in the English High Court. The husband was the settlorof the H Trust. The Royal Court also encouraged the trusteeto assist in giving effect to any reasonable arrangement     

Taxation and trusts

It really is necessary that people, resident and taxable inEngland, should die earlier. Long life is an anti-social activity.It denies the government taxation to which it feels it is trulydue. Early deaths, particularly amongst the wealthy, are necessary:it is the patriotic duty of those with wealth to shuffle offtheir mortal coil as soon as possible and to allow the governmentas much inheritance tax as possible. Ghoulish though this mayseem, it is clearly a view of the current British Government. Why do we say this? The Paymaster General, in explaining thenew rules for inheritance tax treatment of settlements, justifiedher policy in the term ‘Because trusts do not die,     

论酌量不起诉

我国现行刑事诉讼法取消了免予起诉,确立了酌量不起诉制度。然而,司法实践中由于种种原因,检察机关对该项诉讼制度几乎弃之不用。本文分别探讨了酌量不起诉的理论依据及其诉讼价值,并研究了司法实践中存在的几个具体问题,鲜明地提出应当大胆依法适用酌量不起诉制度,以充分发挥其功能的观点。     

Antigua introduces robust legislation for asset protection trusts

This article highlights key considerations of the InternationalTrust Act of Antigua. The Act authorizes self-settled spendthrifttrusts. Such trusts are used for asset protection in a numberof offshore jurisdictions, but are not authorized in a numberof other jurisdictions, including many States in the UnitedStates.     

Discretionary review and undesired cases

Courts sometimes face cases that may result in adverse post-judgment official or public reactions. Such real-world repercussions—e.g., open defiance by public officials—can be more costly for the court than the benefit of hearing and deciding the case. In these situations the court may be better off not taking the case from the outset. This paper examines how courts deal with such cases when they can avoid adjudication—discretionary dockets. Using a stylized screening model, the paper examines the implications of such discretion. In particular, it shows that some undesired real-world outcomes are inevitable; and that broad control over their dockets should lead judges to take fewer cases in which the government is involved. Further, the paper discusses this logic from a comparative design perspective. The two prevalent models of judicial review, the American and the European, seem to take opposing stances on discretionary review; however, both narrow supreme courts’ control over their dockets, either by directly limiting their discretionary jurisdiction or by decentralizing judicial review.     

论行政裁量理由的说明

理由是将特定事实带入某一法律要件作出决定的原因说明。在行政机关行使裁量权时,不说明裁量理由,就无法让人知晓为何在裁量权的范围内作出该决定。根据行政法治原理,应当将说明裁量理由设定为法定义务,以论证裁量决定合乎法律。公开裁量决定的判断和选择过程,这既有助于抑制行政机关的恣意,也有助于说服行政相对人,也便于私人寻求救济和司法实施审查。裁量理由与裁量决定应当具有同时性和一体性。没有说明或者说明不充分时,因行政机关没有按照要求说明裁量理由,为尊重行政机关的首次判断权起见,法院应撤销裁量决定;如果行政机关在事后以其他理由替换原先已说明的理由,在没有改变主要理由时,法院则可基于诉讼经济原则一并审查,一次性解决纠纷。     

小议检察机关量刑建议权

量刑建议权是检察机关请求审判机关在对被告人定罪的基础上进一步判处刑罚的权力。但长期以来,对于量刑建议权存在的可能性和必要性及其行使的范围、程度,理论界和司法实践中,尚未有统一之说。本文作者结合司法实践,对量刑建议权的必要性及可行性操作等谈一些粗浅的看法。     

不起诉裁量权研究

不起诉裁量权是与起诉便宜主义密切相连的、法律特别授予或认可的检察官对于起诉与否的选择权。因而,各国在公诉问题上的基本立场直接影响着立法对检察机关不起诉裁量权的态度。我国立法有关酌定不起诉的规定,赋予了检察机关有限的不起诉裁量权,同时也意味着对起诉便宜主义积极价值的肯认。两大法系在此问题上存在不同作法,自有其不同原因,我国应采取有效措施,补正现行制度的缺陷,推动相关制度的进一步完善。     

死刑适用中的酌定因素研究——兼议《关于办理死刑案件审查判断证据若干问题的决定》第36条

酌定量刑因素在死刑立即执行改判为死缓或无期徒刑案件的量刑中发挥了重要作用.酌定量刑因素主要包括:案件起因、犯罪动机、犯罪对象、犯罪手段、犯罪时间、地点、犯罪前的一贯表现、犯罪后的态度和表现、被害方谅解.法院应该在罪刑相适应与刑罚个别化相结合原则指导下,正确运用酌定量刑因素,以达到限制死刑适用的目的.