SLAPPs: Intent or Content?Anti-SLAPP Legislation Goes International

Due to the increasing interest in adopting anti-SLAPP legislation outside of the USA (where it was first implemented), the definition of what constitutes a SLAPP is being questioned. Some commentators have advanced the suggestion that, in order to account for jurisdictional differences, outside of the USA it is the motivation to intimidate or chill public speech that is the aspect of a SLAPP on which anti-SLAPP legislation must focus. However, defining SLAPPs by the initiator's alleged intent to intimidate can render anti-SLAPP legislation, in any jurisdiction, ineffective. SLAPPs should be defined by the involvement of public participation, rather than by the intent of the SLAPP plaintiff. Effective anti-SLAPP legislation employs procedural protections that are engaged once a threshold demonstration has been made that the case involves protected public interest communications. Generally, this approach is appropriate to adopt in any jurisdiction where the legislature desires to protect public interest communications.     

From the Streets to the Courtroom: The Legacies of Quebec's anti-SLAPP Movement

Years of social mobilization and sustained political lobbying led to the recent adoption of anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) legislation in Quebec. While this achievement was largely seen as a victory by the organizations that led the campaign towards the enactment of anti-SLAPP measures, many questions remain about the level of protection offered by the new law to citizens of the province. This article aims to address these questions and will be divided into three parts. The first section will briefly contextualize Quebec's new legislation within the larger Canadian framework. The second section will explore the social and political processes that led to the enactment of the legislation. Finally, we will examine the provisions of Bill 9 in order to determine whether it provides an appropriate response to SLAPP suits.     

Anti-SLAPP Law Reform in Australia

The last 20 years has seen a growth in litigation against public participation in Australia and a broadening of the mechanisms used. Following changes to the defamation laws in 2005, commercial torts are increasingly being used against critics and protest groups. Australia's highest profile example, the so-called 'Gunns 20' case, brought the problems of such litigation into the public realm and provided a major impetus for law reform. One Australian jurisdiction has now adopted limited anti-Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPP) legislation and SLAPPs are being raised in the context of national debates over a Human Rights Act. However, comprehensive anti-SLAPP law reform is still some way off.     

Legislation and review of medical research with minors in The Netherlands

In The Netherlands medical research with minors is regulated in the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act. During the legislation process in the Houses of Parliament in the 1990s the issue of nontherapeutic research with minors and incapacitated subjects was heavily debated. Stringent regulations were formulated for this type of research and the Act became operational in December 1999. In order to implement the Clinical Trial Directive 2001/20/EG, the Act was modified on several issues. However, the Act was not modified on the issue of non-therapeutic research with minors and incapacitated subjects. As a result at present the Dutch law is more restrictive on non-therapeutic research with minors than the EU Directive. Currently, discussion is ongoing to adapt the Dutch law in order to harmonize it with the EU Directive.     

刑法预防性立法对犯罪学之影响:困境与出路

当代风险社会及其构成要素,是互相联系、互相成就和互相影响的刑法学与犯罪学的共同知识场域。预防性立法模式在刑法立法实践中确立,预防型犯罪也被简化为安全的技术辅助。犯罪学研究的犯罪现象、原因和对策随之发生变化,其研究范式也便面临危机和挑战。针对预防刑法的“事前法”特征,对其进行研究的犯罪学也应转向“事前”犯罪学。事前犯罪学在传统的“现象-原因-对策”研究范式的基础上,更应进行问题意识和研究方式的转化,为预防性立法走向理性、科学和合理贡献知识。事前犯罪学理论知识,要进入预防性立法的决策场域,就应寻找适合预防性立法的犯罪学逻辑体系。其展现的知识逻辑和问题意识,不是要和预防刑法知识体系合谋,而是要在既有理论的基础上,整合和构建恰当的研究范式和知识库存、跨学科借新智、打破传统事实学窠臼、遵守法治精神,据此走出困境,也为预防性立法提供根据。     

《网络犯罪公约》中的证据调查制度与我国相关刑事程序法比较

20 0 1年 11月 8日欧洲委员会《网络犯罪公约》是国际社会合作打击网络犯罪的第一个国际公约 ,其主要目标是在缔约方之间建立打击网络犯罪的共同的刑事政策、一致的法律体系和国际协助。该公约第二章“国家层面上的措施”的第二部分“程序法”规定了有关电子证据调查的特殊程序 ,为各国制定电子证据刑事调查制度提供了一套具有开创价值的立法模型。本文对《网络犯罪公约》中的程序法规定和我国相关立法进行了比较 ,并提出了完善我国电子证据刑事调查措施的立法建议     

陕甘宁边区高等法院推行婚姻自由原则的实践与经验

陕甘宁边区的婚姻立法,确立了“男女婚姻自由”的原则。在司法实践中,陕甘宁边区高等法院通过对婚约的适度保护,对离婚自由的适当限制,尤其是对童养媳的坚决取缔以及对寡妇再嫁的支持和保护,使婚姻自由原则与陕甘宁边区的社会实际相互契合。陕甘宁边区高等法院司法档案,为我们考察陕甘宁边区处理婚姻纠纷的实践与经验,提供了可能。在司法实践中,一项具体的法律原则所包含的内容,应当与特定时期的政治、经济、文化状况保持一致,并随着社会的发展进步,灵活地予以调整。司法档案具有帮助理解法律存在的社会基础、反映制定法命运、解读立法内涵的作用。     

高等教育发展中的政府角色与教育立法

我国高等教育发展中的政府角色是由政府的职权与职责、行为及其方式、对行政相对人合法权益的保护等多方面内容综合予以体现的。对政府角色进行定位是教育立法中的核心问题之一,它是教育立法中确定立法的目标、原则、内容时必须涉及的问题。政府角色的转换与教育法律法规的制定、修改之间亦是相辅相成、密不可分。高等教育领域中,我国政府正由单纯的管理型政府向有限政府、治理型政府、责任型政府、服务型政府等多元角色转换,对此,立法将作出必要的回应:软法与硬法的混合治理、教育行政行为方式多样化与手段柔性化、对行政相对人进行全面救济将是未来教育立法的主要趋势。     

Libel Cases and Public Debate – Some Reflections on whether Europe Should be Concerned about SLAPPs

In recent years, Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) have become well-recognized as challenging free speech and public participation in the USA, Canada and Australia. However, in Europe SLAPPs remain largely unrecognized with little consideration of their use and impact. This paper argues that SLAPPs are used in Europe and have been neglected for a number of reasons. In order to examine the European SLAPP situation, this paper focuses on libel law in England and Wales. It considers the debate on free speech that has flowed out of libel cases and concludes by reflecting on what advantages might flow from a refocusing of that debate that includes a recognition of SLAPPs.     

知识产权法典化论证质评

在中国知识产权的立法进程中,存在“特别立法”、“单独法典”和“作为民法典的一篇”三种模式,它们基本上沿袭了世界上既有的知识产权三种立法模式。在理论界,多数学者指出,知识产权的法典化是历史发展的必然趋势。在方法论上他们多数采用的是比较、逻辑的进路;在知识资源上多数依赖的是比较法和历史史实的支撑。法典化论者有关制定知识产权法典的论证是不充分的。在中国语境下,与“特别立法”模式相比,“法典化”具有一种比较优势;但它不具有现实性。比较说来,中国当前应当制定一部《知识产权法通则》。     

立足法律监督角度审视《民事诉讼法》的修改

"申诉难"与"执行难"这两大固疾困扰司法实务由来已久,此次《民事诉讼法》的修改在解决这两大难题方面作了突破性立法。修改后的《民事诉讼法》就解决"申诉难"问题进行了详细的规定,作为法律监督角色的检察机关如何应对《民事诉讼法》的修改后的新局面将成为民事检察工作的当务之急。检察机关应提高对民事诉讼审判活动的监督能力,明确民事诉讼监督的当务之急,强化民事诉讼监督理念和提高民事抗诉水平。     

新《民事证据规定》视角下鉴定人制度定位问题研究

鉴定人角色定位是鉴定人制度中的一个基本问题,它决定着鉴定人的制度设计及鉴定人在诉讼中的权利、义务以及责任的承担。从比较法角度看,英美法系国家的专家证人属于证人,具有党派性的特征。大陆法系国家在鉴定人角色定位问题上有不同的观点。通过梳理发现,这些观点可总结为证据方法说、证据调查说和折衷说三种。在我国,经过民事诉讼立法及相关司法解释的相继出台,鉴定人定位问题的脉络越来越清晰。2019年12月,新《民事证据规定》颁布,鉴定人定位的明晰成为理解、适用新《民事证据规定》鉴定人制度的前提。术语上的届分、内容上的区别是制度完善的基础,"双重属性"下其他专家制度的配套适用也是问题解决的路径。     

Recent developments in medicine and law

This article focuses on certain noteworthy legislation and cases affecting medicine and law during the period September 1, 2001, to August 31, 2002. It does not attempt to discuss every case or piece of legislation, but instead seeks to summarize some of the more significant developments in this area of law.     

“新闻(媒体)侵权”否认说

侵权责任法不应规定"新闻侵权"或"媒体侵权"。依文义分析看,支持"新闻(媒体)侵权"者,既未能明确协调好"新闻(媒体)侵权"与侵害名誉权、侵害隐私权等侵权行为之间的关系,又未能解决好"新闻(媒体)侵权"的特殊性问题;从比较法上看,无论是大陆法系的老法典、新法典,还是比较注重实用和实践经验的美国法,都没有承认"新闻(媒体)侵权";我国的立法与司法解释也从未规定过"新闻(媒体)侵权"。"新闻(媒体)侵权"之所以不被世界各国所采纳,根本原因在于,它与近现代民法的基本技术方法背道而驰。     

The Failure of Defamation Law to Safeguard against SLAPPs in Ontario

The authors examine the failure of the law of defamation in Canada to reflect changed realities with respect to public participation in decision-making processes and the impact that this has had on Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) in the Ontario context. They examine the enhancement of the public's substantive and procedural rights to participate in environmental decision-making processes reflected in legislation at the international, federal and provincial levels. They argue that SLAPPs threaten to reverse these shifts in norms in the development of public policy. The authors review anti-SLAPP legislation as well as the evolution of defamation law in Canada and other jurisdictions and conclude by offering some law reform recommendations for Ontario.     

论仲裁裁决的既判力

无论在英美法系国家还是在大陆法系国家,仲裁裁决的既判力都得到了承认。很多国际商事仲裁机构也采用了仲裁裁决的既判力理论。我国对仲裁裁决既判力问题研究得较少,法律规定也不明确。但是,赋予仲裁裁决既判力具有必要性和合理性;通过分析我国现有的法律规定,剖析仲裁裁决既判力的主客观范围,有必要重新审视我国的有关理论和立法。     

The Legal Position of the Married and Unmarried Father Under English and Dutch Law: Sharing Parenting or Just Going Dutch?

This article addresses the issue of the legal position of the married and unmarried father under English and Dutch law. The legal position under English Law in the UK for the married and unmarried father may be familiar to English family lawyers. The situation for unmarried fathers can be seen as more 'precarious' and less legally secure than that of the married father in terms of the legal recognition of fatherhood and the exercise of parental responsibility. Fathers who are not married to the mothers of their children are not recognised as 'fathers' in law in the same way as the married father. They will possess the automatic parental responsibility that the married father has, as a result of the implementation of new legislation which acts as a 'gateway' to the effective exercise, in legal terms, of 'fathering' activities. Whilst there have been some reforms, this are set in the context of problems and difficulties in regulating unmarried relationships in general. There is disparity in legal treatment between the married and the unmarried relationship, fatherhood in particular, but this distinction shows signs of diminishing, as it has done under Dutch law. In The Netherlands, as in a lot of other European countries, family law has been subject to continual law reforms, as a consequence of social developments. Also decisions of the European Court of Human Rights have forced the Dutch government to adapt legislation. Due to the equality principle, many benefits of marriage are now also granted to unmarried people. Since the extended law reform in 1998 the terms 'legitimate' and 'illegitimate' child – for children born inside and outside of marriage – no longer exist. Instead the term 'family ties' was introduced. This article will discuss the major issues which concern the legal position of the married and the unmarried father under English and Dutch law.     

论我国地下空间利用法的建构

我国正处在地下空间利用的快速发展期,相关法律的缺失导致了不少问题和隐忧,十分有必要建构地下空间利用法。我们要建构地下区分地上权法、地下征收征用法、地下登记法、地下建设基准法、地下空间规划法、地下空间利用促进法、大深度法、地下环境保护与灾害防治法等。在建构的进程中应该走综合化的道路,尽量中央立法和复合立法。     

论中国《反垄断法》实施中的相关市场界定

Defining relevant markets is the foundation of establishing main antimonopoly regimes and the key issue in enforcing antimonopoly law, which often reflects the leniency or strictness of enforcement. In the process of defining relevant product market, the main factors to be considered include physical function and use purpose of product, product price, consumers’ preference and substitutable possibility of product supply. In defining relevant geographic market, the main consideration involves transportation cost and product characteristics, product price, consumers’ preference and barriers to market access. On the occasion of forthcoming enforcement of the Antimonopoly Law of China, the enforcement authorities should draw up a specific rule of the definition of relevant markets. Wang Xianlin got his Ph.D from Law School of Renmin University of China (2001) and is a Fulbright visiting scholar at Law School of George Washington University (2007–2008). Prof. Wang is a director of Economic Law Institute and a doctoral tutor in Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Law. He was once a member of the advisory committee of antimonopoly legislation of the Legal Affairs Office of the State Council of P.R.C. and is a standing director of the Economic Law Academy affiliated with China Law Society. His research focuses on competition law and intellectual property law. He has ten books published individually or cooperatively, including the monograph, such as the Intellectual Property and Antimonopoly Law—Studies on antimonopoly issues of abuse of intellectual property rights and WTO competition policy and Chinese antimonopoly legislation and abuse of intellectual property rights and its regulation. Moreover, he has released over 100 papers in academic journals. In recent years, his research is focused on China’s antimonopoly legislation and the abuse of IPRs of multinational companies in China.     

环境侵权视野下的因果关系推定

古典因果关系理论不适应现代社会,在环境侵权领域,因果关系之调整以及因果关系推定之确立乃属必然.因果关系推定要素包括受害人初步证明、推定以及加害人反证三项,就立法体例而言,因果关系推定各国规定有以免责条款规定式和直接规定式两种,在未来民法典中,我国不妨一并采纳.在适用上,因果关系推定应扩大至特殊侵权领域,并辅之以规范设计.