The Closeness Problem and the Doctrine of Double Effect: A Way Forward

A major challenge to the Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE) is the concern that an agent’s intention can be identified in such a fine-grained way as to eliminate an intention to harm from a putative example of an intended harm, and yet, the resulting case appears to be a case of impermissibility. This is the so-called “closeness problem.” Many people believe that one can address the closeness problem by adopting Warren Quinn’s version of the DDE, call it DDE*, which distinguishes between harmful direct agency and harmful indirect agency. In this paper, I first argue that Quinn’s DDE* is just as vulnerable to the closeness problem as the DDE is. Second, some might think that what we should therefore do is give up on intentions altogether and move towards some kind of non-state-of-mind, victim-based deontology. I shall argue against this move and explain why intentions are indispensable to an adequate nonconsequentialist theory. Finally, I shall propose a new way of answering the closeness problem.     

Imperium in Imperio and the Political Origins of the American Labor Conspiracy Doctrine

Many political essayists and judges writing in the early republic sought to circumscribe actions deemed oppressive and otherwise interfering with civil liberty. Associations seeking to advance a set of narrow interests at the expense of the public posed a threat to civil liberty. The way that threat was interpreted in the specific case of labor associations is the subject of this article. It was not the economic power of such entities that gave rise to indictments. Rather the political significance of "private confederacies" acting as an "imperium in imperio" was cited as the key threat to the new political order. Thus, Judge Levy in granting legitimacy to the American labor conspiracy laws did not cite common law precedent but his concern that "a new legislature consisting of journeymen shoemakers" would usurp the legitimate power "of our state legislatures."     

A Phantom Doctrine: The Origins and Effects of Just v. Marinette County

No branch of zoning law is more perplexing than the constitutional limits of the police power. How severely may the government reduce the value of land by regulation without compensating the owner? This issue has become particularly prominent during the last decade, as state and local governments have sought to preserve the landscape by novel and sometimes stringent land-use controls. Recently, some scholars have suggested that the familiar “diminution-of-value” test for determining when regulations become unconstitutional should be abandoned, even in cases where the prohibited use is not akin to a nuisance, and the effect of the regulation is to render the tract worthless. In Just v. Marinette County, the Wisconsin Supreme Court seemed to adopt this idea, declaring that development of a shoreland marsh may be forbidden irrespective of the economic impact on the landowner. Naturally, such decisions create the impression that property owners are regularly being sacrificed for the sake of environmental quality. But a study of Just's origins and effects reveals that in Wisconsin and Minnesota this impression of regulatory zeal is inaccurate. As a rule, all four of the counties studied allowed owners of shoreland marshes to fill enough of the marsh to make a remunerative use of the tract. Their main concern was not to preserve marshes but rather to attach erosion-control conditions to the fill permits. Cases in which a county, by denying a fill permit, drastically reduced the value of the land, have been extremely rare, even in the three Wisconsin counties studied, where under Just such denials are clearly constitutionally permissible. In these counties, it appears that ideology and politics, not constitutional law, are the major factors limiting the severity of conservancy zoning and consequently the extent to which this technique preserves open space. In jurisdictions where this is so, it seems likely that judicial decisions that permit the government to prohibit all remunerative uses are more likely to rationalize unjust treatment of an occasional landowner than to make a major contribution toward preserving environmental quality.     

物权法定主义：在自由与强制之间

对物权法定主义的传统解释导致了物权法的僵硬性 ,不符合社会经济的现实需要。不同物权类型的性质不同 ,在法律体系和社会生活中的地位和作用也不相同。可以把物权分为基础性物权与功能性物权。前者主要包括所有权、基地使用权等用益物权、典权和自然资源使用权 ;后者主要包括抵押权、质权、让与担保和留置权等。当事人设定功能性物权的根本目的是利用物的基础性权利 (如所有权 )来担保债权的实现。在法律上 ,对于基础性物权应当坚持物权法定主义 ,而功能性物权则可由当事人自由创设。     

《反垄断法》与效果理论

我国《反垄断法》确立了建立在效果原则基础上的反垄断法域的运用制度，效果原则确立了国家管辖权行使的法律前提。但这一原则与传统的国际法有关国家管辖权的基本原则——属地管辖原则大相径庭，故自该原则在美国出现以来一直遭到国际法学界的强烈质疑。在此背景下，我国的《反垄断法》明确主张“效果理论”，显然有必要在法学理论上进行充分、周密的分析和探讨。     

案卷移送主义视野下的非法证据排除规则

早在新民主主义革命时期,一些革命根据地就在刑事诉讼中形成了案卷移送主义的司法传统。在第一部刑事诉讼法典颁布以后,案卷移送主义被视为职权主义审判方式的重要配套措施。在对抗制审判方式改革和刑事诉讼法的两次修改过程中,案卷移送主义不仅由庭前移送发展到庭后移送,而且由司法层面上升到立法层面。尽管案卷移送主义在特定条件下具有一定积极意义,但是在案卷材料与法庭之间的联系没有被彻底切断的情况下,非法证据排除规则存在的必要性就会大打折扣。因为,案卷移送主义不仅导致法庭的非法证据调查流于形式,而且导致法庭难以排除受到辩护方质疑的非法证据。     

变劣行为侵犯专利权之研究

变劣行为是改变专利技术方案并使其技术效果降低的行为,变劣侵权是构成侵犯专利权的变劣行为。但变劣行为只有符合一定条件才能构成侵犯专利权的行为,这些条件包括变劣行为必须是对专利方案的技术特征的变更,变劣后的技术方案实现了技术效果的降低,变劣行为与技术效果的降低具有因果关系,变劣后的技术未落入现有技术的范围及变劣行为的显而易见性。而且变劣侵权与等同侵权密不可分,变劣侵权实质是一种特殊的等同侵权行为。     

诚实信用原则综论

诚实信用原则是现代合同法乃至整个民法的一项极为重要的基本原则,为世界各国民事法律所普遍确认.作为道德法律化的一项民法基本原则,诚实信用原则的作用不仅仅在于指导当事人的行为,也是立法和司法的一项重要原则.在具体的司法实践中,诚实信用原则有利于平衡双方当事人及其与社会之间的利益关系,最大限度地实现效率目的.在实践中,应准确理解立法意图,结合当时社会的具体情况,对适用诚实信用原则掌握一个合理的界限.     

The Transatlantic Origins of the Business Trust

The trust form may have afforded transaction planners all the incidents of so-called ‘corporateness' prior to the enactment of general incorporation statutes, but in England the Companies Acts hindered the development of the business trust, and in the United States, the inability of the common law to distinguish adequately between partnerships and trusts made its use uncertain. Whereas the common law in England charted a complicated path to circumvent prohibitions in the Companies Acts, undoing confusion in American common law, which relied on English precedent, required legislative intervention. This narrative complicates interpretations of the state's role in the development of organizational law. The state could help to break down intellectual barriers impeding the progress of the common law as much as the common law could seek out ways in which to circumvent the strictures of state-imposed regulation.     

政治问题理论的衰落与重构

政治问题作为可推翻的"自然推定",属于可诉性理论的阻却事由要件。其理论发轫于联邦党人对宪法"特定条款"的阐述。为了应对将政治问题理论区分为经典形式与审慎形式所带来的司法操作性难题,布伦南大法官通过描述政治问题的六个特征,构建了政治问题的确认标准。然而,法院在适用政治问题确认标准的过程中所形成的政治问题理论的循环悖论,以及学界对政治问题理论存在合理性的质疑使得其经典形式出现变异、审慎形式日渐消亡。在激励相容理论基础上重构政治问题理论,可以尝试化解学界对政治问题免于司法审查理论基础的种种非议。     

哈蒙主义的重新审视

跨界地表水资源事关沿岸国社会和经济发展的根基以及生态环境保护的关键,其开发利用方面的利益分配成为有关国家明争暗夺的焦点.哈蒙主义或称绝对领土主权主义是上游国为争取有利于自己的制度安排而提出的一种政策性主张.它的产生体现了偶然性与必然性的统一,其消长也基于种种原因.虽然哈蒙主义于大多数学者看来在学术界从未获得广泛推崇,但是它的某些现实和客观作用至今仍然存在,是其他主义产生、形成或者发展的基础或者关键考量因素.需要深思的一个问题是:哈蒙主义真的一无是处、荡然无存了吗?作为世界上跨界河流最多的国家之一,我国需要基于对哈蒙主义的全面认识和深刻理解,在制定和实施跨界地表水资源开发利用保护的法律与政策时,注意扬其之长、避其之短.     

The Legislative Origins of the MPs' Expenses Scandal

The MPs' expenses scandal of 2009 was one of the most controversial Parliamentary events of modern times. It had a profound impact on public perceptions of MPs and led to the Parliamentary Standards Act 2009. Little academic consideration has, however, been given to the legislative origins of the scandal and the role of ministers and MPs in the creation of the system for MPs' expenses under the Finance Act 1984. Using official documents obtained by Freedom of Information requests, we construct a comprehensive historical analysis of how – without one word of debate in Parliament and only minimal media coverage – ministers and MPs created a special statutory scheme for their own benefit, which they had effective control of and which exempted their expenses claims from the rules applying to other UK taxpayers and the jurisdiction of the Inland Revenue.     

专利侵权诉讼中权利要求的解释规则——广东通宇通讯设备有限公司诉摩比天线技术（深圳）有限公司专利侵权案

[本案要旨] 专利权作为一种知识产权，具有无形性，其界限并非一目了然，专利权保护范围的确定是成为解决专利纠纷的基础。专利的保护范围由权利要求确定，同时说明书和附图也可以解释权利要求。如何合理有效地解释权利要求，从而确定权利要求的保护范围，成为解决专利侵权纠纷的重点和难点。     

等同原则的适用及限制——以规制专利权滥用为视角

加强对等同原则在适用中的限制、明确统一的判定标准具有重要的现实意义。一是在适用等同原则时应将“整体比较”原则和“逐一要素比较”原则综合起来对案例加以判定；二是对于发明点的技术特征不宜适用等同原则；三是禁止反悔和自由公知技术原则应纳入到等同原则的适用条件中，而不能仅仅作为抗辨原则；四是建立统一的上诉法院，制定统一的等同原则适用标准。     

美国多元主义政体成因探析

美国的政治过程是由一批权力中心的运作来体现的美国是典型的多元主义政体国家，这一强调个人和公民社会权利的政治体制表现为权力中心的多元化。多元主义政体在美国的形成不是偶然的，而是由美国独特的历史背景、自由主义的政治哲学、人们对纯粹民主政治可能导致弊端的担心以及美国利益多元化等多方面因素决定的。了解美国政治本质特征及其成因，有助于我们认识美国政治和美国政府的决策过程。     

The Punctuated Origins of Senate Polarization

This article uses a new dynamic ideal‐point estimation method that incorporates smoothing techniques to construct a more detailed account of Senate polarization. The results reveal that the Senate polarized in two distinct phases. Member replacement accounts for nearly all of the increase from the early 1970s through the mid‐1990s after which ideological adaptation emerges as the dominant force behind polarization. In addition, I find that a few brief periods of intensified partisanship account for most of the increase in polarization since the mid‐1990s, suggesting that these episodes have had significant and lasting effects.