裁判思维下的公司机会原则——以《公司法》第149条为中心

公司机会原则的适用主体总体上可以准确地界定为董事、高级管理人员和控股股东,不包括监事和独立董事。公司机会的认定取决于是否源于职务便利获取,而不应限定为是否在执行职务过程中获取。公司机会原则与竞业禁止存在竞合,但是两者又各有不同,不应将二者混淆。公司机会原则与保密义务存在牵连,需要分清。违反公司机会原则,公司享有归入权和损害赔偿请求权。特定情形下,公司可以向机会提供的第三人索赔。     

公司机会准则的司法裁判

源于美国普通法的公司机会准则,具有平衡公司与董事之间利益诉求冲突的功能。为使这一功能在实践中得到充分发挥,我国《公司法》应当借鉴美国法中的丰富判例与成熟规则,对公司机会认定标准与董事得以合法利用的情形作出明确细致的规定,以增强该制度的可操作性,促进司法裁判的有效开展。     

公司机会准则研究

公司机会准则是英美国家公司法的一个重要理论 ,它确立了董事不得篡夺公司机会义务。判断一个交易机会是否是公司机会 ,须根据交易机会之不同而采不同方法。董事不得篡夺公司机会义务与董事的竞业禁止义务间不是种属关系 ,而是交叉关系 ,这就决定了我国公司法应在规定竞业禁止制度之外 ,另行导入公司机会准则     

The First Amendment Right to Receive Online Information in Public Libraries

A decade after the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the Children's Internet Protection Act, which mandated Internet filters in public libraries, filtering problems have not been resolved, and the disabling of Internet filters upon the requests of adults does not seem to be as easy or automatic as the justices had presumed. In upholding CIPA, the Supreme Court seemed to misunderstand the parameters of the disabling provision, ignored the right-to-receive doctrine, and missed the opportunity to update public forum doctrine to include the Internet. This article concludes that the Court needs to reevaluate public forum doctrine in the context of twenty-first century technology and designate Internet access in public libraries as a metaphysical public forum.     

Applying the Responsibility to Protect to the ‘Arab Spring’

The doctrine of the responsibility to protect, since its inception in the ICISS report of 2001, has been the subject of considerable discussion. Arguably its most publicised component is the principle that the international community has the responsibility to protect civilian populations against severe suffering where the relevant national authorities are unable or unwilling to do so. Consequently, the main focus of discourse upon the responsibility to protect has centred on its impact upon the approach of the international community to intervention in respect of situations posing considerable humanitarian crises. The events of the Arab Spring, in which full blown conflict in some states gave rise to serious human suffering, provided a real opportunity for the international community to evaluate the role of the responsibility to protect in decision-making over responding to such instances, and potentially to develop it into a practical and meaningfully implementable concept. However, due to political flaws inherent in the doctrine, and its arguably overstated significance, the doctrine at best played a minimal role in guiding the international response to developments in the Arab World. Nonetheless, responses to the Arab Spring do allow certain conclusions to be drawn in respect of the future relevance of the doctrine.     

LabCorp v. Metabolite Laboratories: The Supreme Court listens, but declines to speak.

In the United States, a longstanding legal rule exists against patenting natural phenomena. The Supreme Court recently had an opportunity to help define the boundaries and clarify the implications of this "natural phenomenon doctrine" in Laboratory Corporation of America v. Metabolite Labs., dismissed as improvidently granted. This article argues that the natural phenomenon doctrine renders both the patent claim at issue in LabCorp, and the patents that directly or indirectly claim biological correlations between genotypes and medical phenotypes, invalid or unenforceable under U.S. patent law.     

The state action doctrine and the Local Government Antitrust Act: the restructured public hospital model

This Article analyzes the development and complexities of the antitrust state action doctrine and the Local Government Antitrust Act as these doctrines apply to both "municipalities" and private entities. The restructuring of a public hospital is used as a model to facilitate the antitrust analysis. The restructuring model, which typically involves the leasing of a hospital facility by a public entity to a private nonprofit corporation, offers the unique opportunity to compare the different standards employed under the state action doctrine and the Local Government Antitrust Act. As a practical matter, the Article provides a framework for a public hospital to evaluate the impact of corporate restructuring on its antitrust liability exposure and to develop strategies to minimize antitrust risks.     

From Sullivan to Nike: Will the Noble Purpose of the Landmark Free Speech Case Be Subverted to Immunize False Advertising?

In deciding not to rule in Nike, Inc. v. Kasky, the Supreme Court of the United States passed up an ideal opportunity to answer an urgent question that derives from two legacies of New York Times v. Sullivan: When speech implicates both the commercial speech doctrine and the political speech doctrine, how should that speech be assessed in terms of First Amendment protection? This analysis focuses upon the essential principles emphasized in Sullivan's landmark assessment of the societal value in protecting some false speech in the discussion of public issues. Concerns over the Nike case's implications for corporate expression must be weighed against the societal interest in preventing false commercial speech from being immunized by attaching it to a public issue.     

The Bosphorus Ruling of the European Court of Human Rights: Fundamental Rights and Blurred Boundaries in Europe

The recent case of Bosphorus Airlines v Ireland provided theEuropean Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) with an opportunity torefine further its relationship with the EU. In particular,the ECtHR was called upon to clarify when States could be heldresponsible for actions taken under the banner of the EU. Thisarticle examines the status quo prior to the Bosphorus judgment,and then scrutinises the judgment itself, focusing particularlyon the use and scope of the doctrine of ‘equivalent protection’to determine State responsibility. The doctrine as outlinedin Bosphorus is applied to some likely scenarios involving EUaction and its relative merits and disadvantages are discussed.The article also briefly addresses the further global implicationsof the judgment, namely for the legal accountability of theUN Security Council and the ongoing issue of responsibilityof international organisations under international law.     

Lost in Translation: Corporate Opportunities in Comparative Perspective

The corporate opportunities doctrine in the United States playsa pivotal role in the contemporary debate about whether Englishlaw’s regulation of when a director can personally exploitan opportunity encountered whilst a director should be moreflexible than it is perceived to be. This article argues thatthis comparative encounter has produced partial and misleadingaccounts of US state corporate law and English law. The articlesubmits three reasons for this. First, English scholarship hasnot taken full account of the institutional context of regulatorycompetition for incorporations within which corporate law inthe United States is produced. This institutional context raisesconcerns about the influence of managerial interests on opportunitiesregulation in the US and raises questions about how an opportunitiesdoctrine could evolve differently in the UK absent the pressuresof regulatory competition. Second, scholars who praise US approachesto the corporate opportunities doctrine as a modern model ofreform allow an idea about the American economy in the late20th century to get in the way of a thorough consideration ofthe purported economic benefits of more flexible regulation.Third, the effect of jurisdictional juxtaposition or contrastleaves a strict, certain impression of English law that brushesover its flexible tensions and ambiguities.     

犯罪人真的是不理性的吗——与陈和华教授商榷

犯罪学研究的犯罪人应当是理性的犯罪人。行为人选择犯罪虽然在价值理性的角度看存在不理性的成分,但是犯罪学的研究应当注重犯罪人行为的实践理性与工具理性。犯罪人对犯罪的长期后果（法律后果）低自控与低自珍不是决定犯罪人非理性的决定因素。适应性非理性应当注重对于犯罪情境的分析。当代理性选择理论强调犯罪人的有限理性,犯罪预防的落脚点在于对于犯罪人犯罪机会的控制与犯罪具体社会情境的抑制。     

论犯罪过失中注意义务的实质标准

注意义务的实质判断标准在刑法理论上分歧较大。英美法系存在着客观说与主客观统一说之分,大陆法系存在着主观说、客观说和折衷说之分,而中国刑法学则存在着主观说与主客观统一说之分。上述学说均存在不妥之处,应采取客观注意的主观化标准学说。     

“存疑有利于被告人”原则的正确理解适用

"存疑有利于被告人"的思想源于古希腊自然法思想之正义观。作为一项法律规范,它最早出现于古罗马时期。在法律文化的变迁过程中,罪刑法定、无罪推定、刑法谦抑主义、正当程序等刑事法律思想为该原则的形成提供了思想滋养与理论支撑。但是,由于缺乏对该原则内涵的准确把握,导致我国司法实践中至今仍存在多种滥用该原则的现象,这不仅损害了司法公正,也削弱了刑法的法益保护机能。所以,对该原则的使用范围、使用条件和使用阶段需要从司法实践出发认真思考。     

论不能未遂的处罚依据——主观危险理论之再提倡

对于不能未遂的处罚依据的认识,当下中国学界主要存在客观危险说、经验的危险感说以及主观危险说三种理论。客观的危险理论及其修正与经验的危险感说在理论本质以及判断逻辑方面都存在一定的问题。与之相对,主观的危险说具有与规范判断紧密相关的正当性依据,能够和我国本土刑法学理论与法律制度衔接,并且能构建逻辑自洽的着手概念。从正当性依据的角度来讲,法益侵害的危险是行为对规范的违反,通过行为哲学与刑法构成要件理论的双重证明,主观危险理论的正当性通过其与规范违反的紧密关联被体现出来;从与本土法律制度的衔接来看,我国刑法的故意概念包含的“认知”与“意欲”要素,为主观危险理论的“规范违反事实认知”要件与“规范违反行为推动”要件提供了刑法理论与制度的土壤;从着手概念的构建来看,结合主观危险理论的上述两个要件,行为着手的时点也能够合理地被构建出来。从主观危险理论中可以提炼出不能未遂案件司法判断的“三步走”的方法论,从而在分析实际案例中最终达到说理的科学性与结论的妥当性。     

<Emphasis Type="Bold">A</Emphasis>nti-corruption agencies: between empowerment and irrelevance

The anti-corruption activity of the 1990s is characterized by the rise of new players, such as specialized anti-corruption bodies. Anti-corruption agencies (ACAs) are public bodies of a durable nature, with a specific mission to fight corruption and reducing the opportunity structures propitious for its occurrence in society through preventive and/or repressive measures. Independently of their format and powers, ACAs encounter various constraints to their mandate, which explains the meagre results obtained by some of them. This introductory paper tries to understand the rise, future, and implications of this new kind of “integrity warrior” and to locate them in the evolving doctrine of corruption control. The objective of this edited volume is to re-launch the debate on ACAs as the most innovative feature of the anti-corruption movement of the last two decades.     

物权请求权与消灭时效

法学理论关于物权请求权的性质有物权说、债权说和独立请求权说。债权说的物权请求权的性质定位,不仅符合法律关系或权利类型的模式化法典建构需要,而且也为消灭时效制度的适用找到了法学依据,同时也为完善立法提供了方法上的指导。     

犯罪论体系片语

犯罪论体系的主要功能在于其刑法典说明书、教科书功能和刑法理论探索功能 ,完美无缺的犯罪论体系是不存在的。作为犯罪论体系核心的犯罪成立理论 ,需要合理地解决分解与综合、事实与价值、结构与次序、肯定与否定、认定与假定以及人权保障等问题 ,国际范围内有代表性的德日犯罪论体系、英美犯罪论体系、法国的犯罪论体系、前苏联的犯罪论体系以及我国的犯罪论体系对于上述问题有着不同的解决路径、方式、方法 ,也就有着各自不同的优点与缺点。     

论公司有限责任制度

公司有限责任制度的核心是公司责任与公司成员责任的分离,股东作为投资者无须对公司的债务承担除了其投资之外的进一步的责任。该制度的建立与发展对调动潜在投资者投资的积极性、发展规模经济、促进公司法律制度完善等方面功不可没。有限责任制度有其客观存在的价值,但并非十全十美,这主要表现在该制度被不当利用而对债权人和其它利益相关者造成的损害,实践中各国多采用有限责任制度例外适用来补救该制度之不足。由于历史原因,我国公司有限责任制度的设立和实施存在诸多问题,必须采取必要的措施完善我国的有限责任制度。     

职权探知主义转向辩论主义的思考

我国民事诉讼法长期奉行职权探知主义。随着审判方式改革的推进,通过司法解释初步确立了辩论主义。但是我国当前民事诉讼中的辩论主义存在诸多缺陷。克服这些缺陷并完善我国民事诉讼中的辩论主义,必须建立起辩论主义的理论体系,改变法官职业群体的传统思维,并对现有的有关辩论主义的制度进行修改、补充和重构。     

信托制度之诚信原则研究

信托制度是民法中的一项重要制度,诚信原则是信托制度的最高原则。本文在回顾了信托制度发展历程的基础上,界定了信托的基本内涵,指出了信托制度适用诚信原则的必要性和必然性,并进一步分析了诚信原则在现代信托制度中的主要体现。作者最后指出我国应根据诚信原则进一步完善信托制度。