论英美刑法中的犯罪疏忽

一、犯罪疏忽的概念和特征(一 )犯罪疏忽 (CriminalNegligence)的含义英国法律委员会在其工作文件中对犯罪疏忽是做如下定义的 ,“如果某人没能象作为一个正常人在他的情况下那样 ,对其行为给予注意 ,发挥技能或者进行预见 ,那么 ,他就是疏忽的。”① 也就是说 ,疏忽是行为人有责任履行某种注意标准 ,但没能达到这种标准 ;以及 ,行为人没能像正常人或者谨慎的人那样 ,在法律要求实施合理行为的情况下合理地实施其行为。因此 ,“疏忽是关于行为标准的要求 ,含有疏于思考、而非心理状态的内容 ,很少成为严重刑事犯罪的要素。”②美国法学会在…     

法理和情理

情感并非只能是任性的和不公正的,并非不能作为法律价值的终极来源.从中国儒家的传统哲学思想出发,一种"中和"的情感是可能通过修身渠道获得的,它可以称为情理.以修身作为治国根本,实质上是奠定社会形而上的价值基础的根本.情理可从修身中被发现,并进入日常生活的正义认知中.在法律推理中,情理可以弥补现代法律的价值亏空.     

Negligence and Human Rights Law: The Case for Separate Development

A number of judges and academics have argued in favour of the convergence of negligence law with human rights law. By contrast, the thesis of this article is that the two legal orders should develop independently, so that for the most part the law of negligence ought not to be affected by human rights considerations. It is argued that the case for convergence is based on two false assumptions, namely that human rights law and negligence law perform similar functions within our legal order and that the norms of human rights law are more fundamental than the norms encapsulated in negligence law. It is also argued that convergence would undermine the coherence of negligence law. Ultimately, the case for separate development rests on the desirability of recognising public law and private law as autonomous normative systems with their own distinctive rationales, concepts and core principles.     

缔约过失责任概念辨析

通过对缔约过失责任传统理论的探讨,从缔约过失责任适用的空间、时间范围,结合我国法律的有关规定,阐明了对缔约过失责任的理解,界定了我国现行法律中规定的缔约过失责任的概念。并就概念的效力确定、法定性及相对性的理解等诸多方面做了论述,阐明了缔约过失责任对民法理论发展的理论意义及实践意义。     

医疗过失鉴定需遵循的原则

医疗纠纷解决中的核心问题是医疗过失的技术鉴定问题,在鉴定实务中,确立判定医疗过失的原则,则是此核心中的核心。本文旨在探讨＂医疗过失评判的基本原则＂,以期规范和指导相关鉴定工作。作者认为,这些原则应包括：（1）遵循＂专业性判断＂的原则;（2）以＂注意义务作为医疗过失判断基准＂的原则;（3）以＂是否尽到与当时的医疗水平相应的诊疗义务＂为审查原则;（4）对＂医疗紧急处置行为的宽泛性＂原则;（5）＂告知-知情-同意＂的原则;（6）＂并发症的审查＂原则;（7）＂医疗意外的免责＂原则等。     

The Good,the Bad,and the Klutzy: Criminal Negligence and Moral Concern

One proposed way of preserving the link between criminal negligence and blameworthiness is to define criminal negligence in moral terms. On this view, a person can be held criminally responsible for a negligent act if her negligence reflects a deficit of moral concern. Some theorists are convinced that this definition restores the link between negligence and blameworthiness, while others insist that criminal negligence remains suspect. This article contributes to the discussion by applying the work of ethicist Nomy Arpaly to criminal negligence. Although not interested in legal issues herself, Arpaly has a well-developed theory of moral agency that explains moral concern in terms of responsiveness to moral reasons. Introducing her work to the ongoing scholarly debate will be helpful for two reasons. First, while a definition of negligence in terms of moral concern is recognized as one proposed solution to the negligence–blameworthiness problem, authors promoting it have yet to give a systematic account of moral concern and its relation to blame. Borrowing Arpaly's account will help clarify the idea of moral concern so that both proponents and critics of a concern approach to negligence can have a better-defined debate. Second, her theory of blameworthiness is especially suited to defending the blameworthiness of negligent actions, because it does not have recourse to a special quality of choice or self-control that must be active to render conduct blameworthy. To make this second advantage clear, the article argues that reliance on choice or self-control problematizes blameworthiness for negligence. Those who wish to defend blameworthiness for negligent acts should base their work on an account of moral agency that does not rely on either choice or self-control to explain when an action is blameworthy.     

医疗过失鉴定需遵循的原则

医疗纠纷解决中的核心问题是医疗过失的技术鉴定问题,在鉴定实务中,确立判定医疗过失的原则,则是此核心中的核心。本文旨在探讨医疗过失评判的基本原则,以期规范和指导相关鉴定工作。作者认为,这些原则应包括:(1)遵循专业性判断的原则;(2)以注意义务作为医疗过失判断基准的原则;(3)以是否尽到与当时的医疗水平相应的诊疗义务为审查原则;(4)对医疗紧急处置行为的宽泛性原则;(5)告知-知情-同意的原则;(6)并发症的审查原则;(7)医疗意外的免责原则等。     

共同过失犯罪的概念及特征

共同过失犯罪,是指负有共同注意义务的二个以上的行为人,由于共同的不注意,共同实施或促成了违反共同注意义务的行为,造成危害结果发生的一种共同犯罪形态。过失教唆犯、过失帮助犯能够成立共犯,即使在立法中予以确认也不会导致处罚范围的扩大和刑法谦抑原则的违反。在共同过失犯罪中,数人实施或促成了违反共同注意义务的共同行为,并且数个行为人都负有防止危害结果发生的共同注意义务,导致了危害结果的发生;在主观方面,各行为人在主观上都是过失,各行为人对危害结果所抱的心理态度也基本相同。     

论共同过失犯罪

从主客观相一致原则和罪责刑相适应原则论证共同过失犯罪统一定罪量刑的合理性,并提出共 同过失犯罪成立的条件和立法献言。     

过失紧急避险的新思考

随着战后新过失犯理论的兴起,过失的紧急避险问题开始引起日本刑法理论上的关注.我国理论上对此问题较少涉及,学者们一般持否定态度.但根据相应的刑事立法以及紧急避险设立的根本宗旨,避险意思应作比较宽泛的理解,只要具有单纯避免危险的意思和认识到有可能会发生损害即可.因此,应该肯定过失紧急避险的成立.     

论共同过失犯罪

关于共同过失犯罪问题,刑法理论界和司法实践部门聚讼颇多,特别是围绕共同过失犯罪能否成立共同犯罪的问题,国内外刑法理论界更是长期存在着肯定与否定之争,难以形成基本的共识。面对我国现代社会发展的新形势,立足于刑事司法实践,借鉴于前人的研究成果,应从正确贯彻刑事政策、完善刑法理论、正确理解共同过失的构造、正确追究刑事责任、兼顾诉讼便利等方面确认共同过失犯罪应当成立共同犯罪。     

破解疏忽大意过失罪过性的两难之题

对当前流行于世的各种说明疏忽大意过失罪过性的见解进行认真的推敲,充分表明在传统罪过理论的语境中,疏忽大意过失的罪过性实在是一个两难之题.立足于疏忽大意过失是有意识的前提,通过分析其罪过性不在认识因素和意志因素,最终得出,情感因素是疏忽大意过失心理中唯一值得谴责的心理因素.     

共同过失犯初论

所谓共同过失犯是指 ,在具有共同注意义务的场合 ,二人以上的行为人由于过失违反自己的注意义务 ,共同引起基本内容相同的违法结果的一种犯罪形态。共同过失犯的成立 ,除了要具有共同犯罪的主体条件外 ,还必须符合一定的客观条件和主观条件。同时 ,必须注意共同过失犯与“过失共同犯”的不同。     

The Negligence Standard: Political Not Metaphysical

This contribution distinguishes two kinds of responsibility: the basic (or ‘metaphysical’) kind that we all inescapably have as functioning human beings; and the assignable (or ‘political’) kind that connects each of us with some particular tasks, and not with others. Having explored some differences between the two, and in particular the role of law's authority in connection with each, the discussion turns to the negligence standard, especially but not only as it figures in tort law. Recently, several philosophers have attempted to find a role for the negligence standard in the metaphysics of basic responsibility. This contribution resists that development and stands up for the traditional lawyer's view that the negligence standard belongs to the pliable politics of assignable responsibility. Basic responsibility, it is argued, is fundamentally strict.     

论医疗注意义务与医疗过失的认定

无论基于医疗契约还是医疗侵权关系，医疗过失的认定标准、考量因素、考察范围都趋于一致。应确定相对客观的医疗过失判定标准，在具体考量时还应兼顾医疗水准等诸多主客观因素。应立足于医院作为医疗损害赔偿责任的“一元”主体，分别从医疗行为和医疗辅助行为去查找医疗过失。审判实务中对医疗过失的认定过分依赖鉴定的流弊应当予以矫正，而应将医疗过失的认定权回归法庭，并辅之以组建专业审判庭、引入专家证人制度作为法庭认定医疗过失的专业保障。     

共同过失犯罪中的违反共同注意义务研究

传统刑法理论是否认共同过失犯罪的,理论研究的发展使刑法学界已不能回避共同过失犯罪的存在.明确违反共同注意义务在共同过失犯罪中的核心地位,准确划分违反共同注意义务的判断对象,正确认识违反共同注意义务的共同过失与竞合过失的区别,对纠正传统理论对共同过失犯罪的误解,建立和完善共同过失罪理论体系有重要的意义.     

析缔约过失责任的性质

本文对将缔约过失责任归属于债权的责任或合同责任的观点进行了评述,指出了其弊端,提出将缔约过失责任作为一个独立的民事责任。     

New Forms of Damage in Negligence

Although damage is an essential component of negligence liability, important extensions of the categories of actionable damage occur with little or no analysis or even acknowledgement of the fact. In this article, consideration is given to a number of new forms of actionable damage which appear either to have received recognition by the courts in recent years, or to be close to receiving such recognition. The article is divided into three core sections, dealing with negligent imprisonment, wrongful conception and educational negligence. The principal conclusions are that redress for negligent imprisonment is best achieved through recognition of imprisonment as actionable damage in negligence; that an unwanted pregnancy is a form of personal injury, albeit an unusual one; that the conventional sum award in wrongful conception cases is best analysed as compensation for a diminution in the parents' autonomy; and that while untreated learning disorders are now treated by the courts as a form of personal injury, in the absence of such a disorder educational under-development ought not to be recognised as actionable damage in its own right.     

业务过失犯罪处罚问题研究

科学技术的发展在给人类带来巨大的福祉的同时,也使得生产、交通、建筑等高风险领域中过失犯罪的发生率持续上升。为保障社会安全,适应惩治和防范业务过失犯罪的需要,应加重我国刑法对业务过失犯罪的处罚,彻底改变刑法对该类犯罪的处罚轻于普通过失犯罪的普遍现象;适当增加业务过失危险犯;改变多数业务过失犯罪法定刑刑种设置的单一性,增设罚金刑和资格刑。     

论医疗损害赔偿的法律适用标准

本文论述了关于医疗损害赔偿法律适用的3种观点,认为医疗损害赔偿既不能适用限额赔偿标准,也不能适用或参照《医疗事故处理条例》的规定,只能适用《民法通则》及有关司法解释等民事法律规范,希望对司法实践有所借鉴意义,并能作为最高院制定医疗纠纷司法解释的参考。