ON CASES AGAINST CORPORATE MANAGERS FOR BREACHING THEIR DUTY OF LOYALTY AND/OR DUTY OF DILIGENCE IN CHINA

The statistics of 137 cases from 14 provinces or municipalities of China concerning the disputes of corporate managers’ duty of loyalty and duty of diligence shows that the majority of companies involved in such cases are those whose shares are not publicly traded (mainly limited liability companies and all sorts of foreign invested enterprises). Joint stock limited companies (including listed companies) rarely file lawsuit against their directors, supervisors, or senior officers. The duty of loyalty has been the center of most cases. Many cases pertain to issues that are not within the list of prohibited acts in the Company Law of the People’s Republic of China to directors, supervisors, and senior managers. Therefore, courts frequently make their judgments according to one of the general provisions of the Company Law. Courts conduct different forms of legal interpretations in their decisions. On one hand, in the majority of cases, courts tend to procedurally examine the questions of facts and to literally apply the law. Actually, the duty of loyalty and duty of diligence have been applied by many courts as “the duty of compliance with law.” On the other hand, a few decisions demonstrate that some courts examine cases under the doctrine of substance-over-form, showing their creative interpretations of the law. The focus of the judicial practice in this type of cases today in China is on how courts should explain and apply the general provisions in Article 148 (1) and Article 149 (1.8) of the 2005 Company Law of China (amended in 2013).     

The Courts in a Fragmented Criminal Justice System

The U.S. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice under President Johnson in 1967 outlined a central role for courts in the criminal justice system. That role, however, has been somewhat diminished by the dominance of plea bargaining and the legislative enactment of mandatory minimum sentences that limit judges’ discretion. At the same time, judges have become more involved in specialized courts dealing in cases involving drugs and mental illness. A major topic of concern is the lower courts, which in many areas have changed little since the 1960s Commission. In those places, the traditional adversary process is not operating well, with many defendants pleading guilty unnecessarily in a system that may be designed primarily to collect fees. In violent crime cases, the imposition of capital punishment remains a controversial issue for states that is not likely to be resolved by a new national commission. The central court functions of sentencing and overseeing plea bargains are discussed elsewhere in this volume.     

Domestic violence case processing: a matter of local legal culture

As one enters a courthouse, its culture is communicated to its listening visitors. The manner in which the security guards speak; the length of time victims are kept waiting; the amount of bail a defendant is assessed; communicate messages to those who are paying attention. Domestic violence cases have long suffered from lenient treatment and dismissals in our criminal courts. This paper examines a unique explanation for this problem: the court’s local legal culture. The elements of two courts’ local legal culture that most profoundly impacted their processing of domestic violence cases are examined. Over a six month period, 23 in depth interviews were conducted with court workgroup members in two courts, one with a specialized domestic violence session and one without. Court room observations were used to supplement these interviews. The results were insightful and telling about how a court’s culture can, at times, be more influential on case processing than the law itself.     

表达自由的理念与限度——香港特别行政区终审法院国旗案与美国最高法院焚烧国旗案比较研究

表达自由权是《香港特别行政区基本法》所确认的公民基本权利之一。该权利在香港特别行政区的司法实践中表现出与美国宪法上的表达自由权很强的可比性:香港特别行政区终审法院与美国联邦最高法院所秉承的表达自由基本理论以及所适用的法律解释方法和司法审查标准等都极为相似;与此同时,在个案处理上,两个法院又结合各自不同的社会背景保持了必要的差异性。香港特别行政区终审法院在基本法的框架下已经初步形成了比较鲜明和稳固的表达自由权的法理。     

资讯＆数据

最高人民法院日前召开新闻发布会,对外公布《关于司法公开的六顼规定》和《关于人民法院接受新闻媒体舆论监督的若干规定》,向社会承诺立案、庭审、执行、听证、文书、审务六公开,规范人民法院接受新闻媒体监督工作。     

Specialized Domestic Violence Courts

Abstract

The multimethod study assesses the perceptions of specialized domestic violence courts' processes with victims' experiences as the central focus. Perceptions of the traditional courts and specialized domestic violence courts are compared among victims, courtroom police, attorneys, judges and victim advocates. Domestic violence education among attorneys, judges, and victim advocates is also compared. Despite the intended improvements with the specialized court model, victims report similar problems in both court models. Safety and victims support among respondents is mixed. Professionals from the specialized court receive no more domestic violence education than those from the general court. Victims' and courtroom police recommendations are presented.     

关于案例指导制度在中国建立的两个困境

我很想对案例指导制度讲一些话,因为前些年在郑州法院搞先例制度的时候,我曾经实地考察过,也和当时的院长比较细致地探讨了这个问题,和他们两位法官也讨论过。两位法官和我有一番论证,他们俩是坚决反对,认为一个区法院怎么可以搞一个先例制度呢？他们认为至少应当在最高人民法院或者是高级人民法院这个层次。     

ROMANCING THE COURT

Problem‐solving courts, created at the end of the twentieth century, make court‐based solutions central to addressing significant societal problems, such as substance abuse and its impact on criminal activity and family functioning. Yet, lessons gleaned from over 100 years of family court history suggest that court‐based solutions to intractable social problems have rarely been effective. This article asks three questions of the problem‐solving court movement: What problem are we trying to solve? Is the court the best place to solve the problem? What are the consequences of giving authority to a court for solving the problem? Answering those questions through the lens of specific examples from family court—the original problem‐solving court—leads to the conclusion that neither the structural issues that courts face, such as overwhelming numbers of cases, nor the momentous societal issues that problem‐solving courts have recently begun to shoulder can be adequately addressed through court‐based solutions. The factors that allegedly distinguish new problem‐solving courts from earlier exemplars, especially the family court, are both less unique and less successful than they have been portrayed by problem‐solving court enthusiasts. These factors alone fail to justify the expansion of problem‐solving courts without further evidence of their effectiveness. Moreover, the potential dangers inherent in problem‐solving courts are not theoretical. By examining illustrative examples from the history of the family court, the dangers become clearly apparent.     

Environmental Considerations for Trauma‐Responsive Juvenile and Family Courts: A Review of the Literature with Recommendations for Practice

Juvenile and family courts serve some of our most vulnerable populations, many of whom have experienced some traumatic event. People suffering with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are known to be more sensitive to environmental stimuli, and many of the environmental conditions within courts can be challenging for those suffering traumatic stress. Trauma‐responsive practices help foster conditions of healing, which can benefit both the court user and those who work within the court. Research reviewed in this article demonstrates the likelihood of negative behavioral and emotional responses to specific environmental factors for people suffering PTSD and other stress reactions, and offers recommendations to minimize environmental stressors.     

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.     

我国民事简易程序的反思与发展进路

我国法院目前适用简易程序审理的案件,实际上已经包含了国外第一审程序所有的三种类型案件,即普通程序、简易程序和小额诉讼程序。三种诉讼标的数额差别很大的案件适用同一种程序,与国际上公认的按照案件的类型设置民事纷争的处理程序的原理发生了明显的冲突。笔者认为,此次《民事诉讼法》修改,首先应将目前按照简易程序审理的案件按照一定的数额标准一分为三;其次,在基层法院要专门设立简易诉讼法庭、小额诉讼法庭,以防止不同类型案件审理上的混同;最后,简易、小额诉讼程序的设置要有助于人们接近司法,有助于法治社会的形成。     

Long-term recidivism of mental health court defendants

The first MHC was established in 1997 and now, over 15 years later, there are over 300 mental health courts in the United States. In a relatively short time these courts have become an established criminal justice intervention for persons with a mental illness. However, few studies have looked at the long-term outcomes of MHCs on criminal recidivism. Of the studies evaluating the impact of MHCs on criminal recidivism, most follow defendants after entry into the court during their participation, and only a few have followed defendants after court exit for periods of one or two years. This study follows MHC defendants for a minimum of five years to examine recidivism post-exit with particular attention to MHC completion's effect. Findings show that 53.9% of all MHC defendants were rearrested in the follow-up and averaged 15 months to rearrest. Defendants who completed MHC were significantly less likely to be rearrested (39.6% vs. 74.8%), and went longer before recidivating (17.15 months vs. 12.27 months) than those who did not complete. This study suggests that MHCs can reduce criminal recidivism among offenders with mental illness and that this effect is sustained for several years after defendants are no longer under the court's supervision.     

Research on the dilemma and improvement of legal regulation for unfair competition related to corporate data in China

Corporate data disputes have been rising rapidly in recent years in China. Courts typically apply the trade secret clause, the Internet clause, and the general clause under the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of PRC to the disputes. However, there are some limitations and problems, including the limited scope of the trade secret clause, the difficulty in interpretation of the Internet clause, and short of sufficient demonstration of the general clause, all leading to the lack of clear rules and guidelines for solving corporate data competition issue. The property nature of corporate data and the business operators’ factual control of the data necessarily require standard legal protection. Corporate data is not the property right, but the property interest protected under the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. For further legal positioning of the corporate data, the paper refers to the trade secret clause’s legislative principles. The paper also learns from the United States and Japan that both information misappropriation rule and newly established ‘shared data with limited access’ provision protect corporate data under their anti-unfair competition law. The paper concludes by providing judicial and legislative suggestions to pave the way for corporate data protection in China. At the judicial level, Chinese courts should clarify the specific application conditions of the general clause. At the legislative level, enacting new legislation ‘data clause’ into the Anti-Unfair Competition Law is necessary to regulate unfair competition behaviors related to corporate data.     

DEVELOPING A UNIFIED FAMILY COURT IN ONTARIO

In Ontario, the Family Courts is a branch of the Superior Court of Justice. The author outlines the Canadian concept of a unified family court and the constitutional problems pecular to its initial establishment in Ontario in 1977, as well as its limited expansion in 1995. The courts is now on the verge of another expansion, which will be quite considerable. Also discussed is the need, in a unified family court, for a judiciary that specializes in family law cases, mediation teams and family law information centers in each court site, and most importantly, liaison and resource committees to support the work of the court.     

区域经济一体化进程中法院执行协助问题研究——以环渤海地区法院之间的委托执行为例

本文针对区域经济一体化进程中日渐增多的法院委托执行问题,对最近十年环渤海地区各级人民法院之间委托执行案件的情况进行了实证考察,分析阐释了委托执行工作中存在的问题及成因,并结合环渤海地区的实际,提出重新配置环渤海地区法院之间委托执行的权限以及完善相关监督机制的设想。     

Specialist domestic violence courts for child arrangement cases:safer courtrooms and safer outcomes?

ABSTRACT

Child arrangement cases in England and Wales are dealt with in the ordinary family courts. Whilst a special practice direction is applicable to child arrangement proceedings where there are allegations of domestic abuse, there is no specialist domestic violence court in the family justice setting. However, court specialisation is a feature of the criminal justice system and has been demonstrated to have success in domestic violence cases. Some of the potential benefits of specialisation, such as the provision of safer courtrooms, might be transferable to the family justice setting. Given the well documented problems of ordinary courts dealing with child arrangements in domestic violence cases, this article considers whether court specialisation could provide victims with safer courtrooms and safer outcomes in child arrangement cases.     

In Search of the Missing Link: Examining Contextual Variation in Federal Charge Bargains across U.S. District Courts

Abstract

Punishment scholars acknowledge the fundamental importance of both prosecutorial discretion and jurisdictional variation in punishment; yet, little is known about the extent to which charging practices vary across court contexts. This is especially true in the federal criminal justice system. This research investigates this issue by linking four years of charging data from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AOUSC) to corresponding data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission (USSC). It incorporates unique information on district court contexts from a variety of sources to investigate jurisdictional variation in charge reductions. Findings provide evidence that federal charging practices vary across district courts. In particular, several structural court characteristics are significantly related to the likelihood of charge reduction for similarly-situated defendants. Results from this study are interpreted through the lens of contemporary legal perspectives on court communities and suggest several fruitful directions for additional research on the social contexts of criminal prosecution.     

实践中的刑事一审期限:期间耗费与功能探寻——以S省两个基层法院为主要样板

透过审限耗费角度的实证研究可以发现,我国基层法院刑事审判程序具有如下特征:庭前程序的"事务化",庭前程序沦为纯粹的案件管理活动;庭审程序的"速审化",庭审时间耗费少,庭审节奏明快;庭后程序的"中心化"与"间隔化"。传统观点认为,我国刑事审限制度具有人权保障和效率提升功能。通过比较和实证的考察发现,我国"贯通式"审限的真实功能为通过监控法官的审理行为,达到塑造与行政化司法制度结构相契合的审理主体的目的。     

Fifty Years After the 1967 Crime Commission Report

In the 50 years since the U.S. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice under President Johnson issued its report, feminist activism and both feminist and mainstream research have resulted in defining domestic violence (DV) as a social problem. This awareness of the seriousness and expansiveness of DV has spurred the development of unprecedented programs and policies. Although DV policing changes have been significant, so too have been the development of and changes in safehouses, no‐drop court policies, domestic violence courts, community‐coordinated responses, and batterer intervention programs. In this article, we review the nonpolice responses to DV cases and outcomes and provide recommendations. First, research and policies need to more regularly be aimed at addressing victims’ safety and their diverse needs and experiences. Second, assessments should include addressing the processing of these cases through the impact of responses by individual community and criminal legal system actors (e.g., victim advocates, police, prosecutors, and judges) to victims and offenders.     

Delay reduction in the federal courts: Rule 50(b) and the Federal Speedy Trial Act of 1974

During the 1970s, 94 federal district courts implemented two major policy initiatives, Rule 50(b) of theFederal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Federal Speedy Trial Act, that were designed in Washington to combat delay in the processing of federal criminal cases. Both of these initiatives established a national priority of delay reduction in criminal cases, encouraged local district court planning for delay reduction; established reporting procedures for monitoring local compliance, and provided for the determination of quantitative goals for the time to disposition of criminal cases. Neither initiative mandated specific activities for delay reduction; this determination was left to the discretion of local federal district courts. This research examines the effectiveness of Rule 50(b) and the Speedy Trial Act by constructing a 150-month time series of three measures of case processing time. A multiple-intervention time-series model found that both of these initiatives contributed to the dramatic reduction in the time to disposition in federal criminal cases. These effects persisted after controls for changes in case characteristics and judicial resources were introduced.Points of view expressed in this research are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the U.S. Department of Justice.