论遗嘱自由之限制:立法干预的正当性及其路径

从平衡遗嘱人意愿与其近亲属利益、否定歧视妇女的传统、维护社会公序良俗、保护社会公平等考虑,均有必要找到遗嘱自由的"恰当底线"。在域外继承法中,无论大陆法或英美法传统的国家和地区,普遍采取措施对遗嘱自由进行一定限制。我国现行《继承法》却对遗嘱处分无所限制,仅必留份除外。该种过度信赖遗嘱人自治的立法,与财产继承法自身承担的职责不符。改革开放以来,遗产分配争议明显增多,与现行遗嘱继承立法不足有直接关系。我国遗嘱继承立法宜借鉴域外继承法经验,对遗嘱处分实施适当的限制,引入结婚导致婚前所立遗嘱无效、特留份制,限制遗嘱处分婚姻居所等,以保护被继承人近亲属的应得继承份额。     

The Application of Human Rights Law to Everyday Civilian Life Under Rebel Control

This article draws upon social science literature to offer a new assessment of the normative value of human rights law vis-à-vis international humanitarian law in territory under armed groups’ control. In particular, the article considers how the two bodies of law can be applied in a complementary manner to regulate the everyday life of civilians who are not involved in hostilities. The article demonstrates that while it might be tempting to imagine that concerns relating to rights such as the freedom of movement, the right to work or protection from common crime are completely displaced by considerations of physical security and survival in times of armed conflict, in reality this is often not the case.

     

I — Legislation

In this paper, the various challenges to the prosecutorial discretion of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) are identified. It deals with two distinct areas of prosecutorial discretion: first, the scope of judicial review relating to prosecutorial decision in the light of the Privy Council judgment of Mohit v The Director of Public Prosecutions [2006] UKPC 20; and secondly, the impact and implications of the decision of the Purdy case which imposes an obligation on the DPP to issue a policy statement as regards conduct which will not be the subject matter of a prosecution even though there may be sufficient evidence to prosecute such conduct under the relevant legislation.     

Godden v Hales revisited – James II and the dispensing power

This article considers whether the King's Bench decision in Godden v Hales (1686) allowing James II to dispense with the application of the Test Acts was correct. Most modern historians believe that the decision was either correct, or at least a justifiable interpretation of the legal precedents; contemporaries overwhelmingly believed the decision was wholly wrong. This article explains the nature and importance of the dispensing power, and considers the relevant case law precedents in detail. It concludes that the line of authorities forbidding the king from dispensing with the anti-simony statutes should have been applied to the Test Acts. The accusations of illegal and unconstitutional conduct relating to the dispensing power made against James II during the 1688 Revolution and in the Declaration of Rights were thus wholly justified.     

Judicial precedents in civil law systems: A dynamic analysis

This paper uses a simple dynamic model to describe the evolution of judicial decision making in civil law systems. Unlike the common law systems, civil law jurisdictions do not adopt a stare decisis principle in adjudication. In deciding any given legal issue, precedents serve a persuasive role. Civil law courts are expected to take past decisions into account when there is a sufficient level of consistency in case law. Generally speaking, when uniform case law develops, courts treat precedents as a source of “soft” law, taking them into account when reaching a decision. The higher the level of uniformity in past precedents, the greater the persuasive force of case law. Although civil law jurisdictions do not allow dissenting judges to attach a dissent to a majority opinion, cases that do not conform to the dominant trend serve as a signal of dissent among the judiciary. These cases influence future decisions in varying ways in different legal traditions. Judges may also be influenced by recent jurisprudential trends and fads in case law. The evolution of case law under these doctrines of precedents is modeled, considering the possibility for consolidation or corrosion of legal remedies and the permanence of unsettled case law.     

关于设立“特留份”制度的立法构想

“特留份”制度的产生源于对遗嘱自由的限制,当今世界各国不仅都在立法上对于遗嘱自由进行了一定程度的限制,而且从法律上规定被继承人应当为配偶和其他近血亲保留必要的遗产份额,已经成为世界上绝大多数国家的立法趋势。在新的社会条件下,我国立法应该怎样构建合理的遗嘱继承制度,从而保护配偶和其近血亲继承人的利益,是立法上急需解决的问题。本文对于有关这一问题的立法提出了自己的构想。     

Bus interdiction efforts by the police:<Emphasis Type="Italic">United States v. Drayton</Emphasis>

The Supreme Court recently addressed the constitutionality of police interdiction efforts when conducting bus sweeps. The Court held that law enforcement officers are not required by the Fourth Amendment to “advise bus passengers of their right not to cooperate and to refuse consent to searches” (U.S. v. Drayton, 2002, p. 2107). The decision may have implications for how the judicial branch will balance the needs of law enforcement against citizen freedoms in the post-September 11th era. This article explores the surrounding legal issues, the case opinion, and policy implications of this case.     

“How an Ordinary Jury Makes Sense of it is a Mystery”: Barristers’ Perspectives on Rape,Consent and the Sexual Offences Act 2003

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 introduced significant reforms to the offence of rape, amid concerns regarding the low reporting and conviction rates for rape. One of the key aims of the Act was to improve the law relating to consent, in order to assist a jury in their decision making process. In addition, disquiet had been expressed with regards to the subjective nature of the mens rea of rape. Consequently, the 2003 Act reformulated the law so as to introduce an objective test. This article discusses the findings of a qualitative research project undertaken with 14 Barristers in the North West of England, in order to investigate counsels’ opinions regarding the 2003 reforms. Drawing upon data collected from semi-structured interviews, the article examines barristers’ perspectives with regards to the definition of consent, the ‘consent presumptions’, and the reformulated mens rea. In conclusion, it will be argued that while the barristers were not overly optimistic about the reforms introduced by the 2003 Act, they were also opposed to further reform to the substantive law and increased jury directions. Barristers argued that the law relating to rape should remain as simple as possible.     

Dintwe v the Directorate of Public Service Management and others: when the court suppresses freedom of expression

This article examines a recent case involving freedom of expression in Botswana and tests it against the country’s constitution. It argues that the Court of Appeal in Botswana erred in the manner in which it adjudicated the case because it departed from well-established common law regarding constitutional interpretation which was laid down by the court itself. If the court had taken the established three past-test approach, it might have reached a different conclusion. In reaching its controversial decision which, we argue, undermined freedom of expression, the court failed to disclose which rights or interests it was protecting in limiting freedom of expression.     

Closing the Floodgates on Privacy Class Actions: Lloyd v Google LLC

In Lloyd v Google LLC [2021] UKSC 50, the Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeal's decision, which had allowed a claim under the Data Protection Act 1998 to proceed as a representative action under CPR 19.6. This is significant because the Court of Appeal's decision arguably paved the way for further data protection/privacy claims to be brought as opt-out ‘class actions’ using this procedure. This case note summarises the Supreme Court decision and assesses its implications for both the procedural law of collective redress and the substantive law of privacy in England. It argues that the Supreme Court's reasoning in relation to both of these areas is sound as a matter of precedent and statutory construction. As a matter of public policy, the decision is likely to re-enliven debate about the availability of collective redress in English law and whether the existing collective proceedings regime should be broadened.     

China's stance on the Google/Motorola merger: Implications for competition in intellectual property-intensive sectors

China's merger enforcement agency approved the Google/Motorola merger with conditions. This pattern of approval is not in full accordance with that in other jurisdictions, including the United States and the European Union, which made unconditional approvals. This contradiction attracted ample criticism; some critics believe that China's policy is designed to protect domestic industry. In investigating the Chinese merger agency's decision and the basis for its decision making, this article finds that much of the criticism is groundless and misleading because the critics have failed to incorporate all elements of the global value chain of mobile intelligent terminals into their analyses. The investigation also shows that, although the decision makers are less experienced, their decisions are based on Chinese competition law and market realities. It is important for international firms to be aware of this pattern in merger analysis.     

The ex turpi causa principle in Hounga and Servier

In Hounga v Allen the majority of the Supreme Court employed a test for the application of the ex turpi causa defence involving the balancing of public policy arguments for and against allowing the defence. Although this has attracted some early academic support, this note will argue it is inconsistent with authority and principle. The later decision in Servier v Apotex does not address the Hounga decision directly but strongly endorses a more conservative approach to the ex turpi causa principle. The resulting tension between these two Supreme Court decisions is likely further to destabilise the law in this area. This note advances arguments in favour of the Servier approach, summarises both decisions in terms of their consistency with authority and considers the ways in which Servier may have limited the effects of Hounga.     

Constructing the Subject of Prostitution: A Butlerian Reading of the Regulation of Sex Work

The Policing and Crime Act 2009 introduced radical reforms relating to the regulation of sex work. In particular, section 14 criminalised paying for sexual services of a prostitute subjected to force. This article will provide a close and critical reading of the official texts relating to this new offence through a discourse theory developed from the work of Judith Butler. Drawing upon Butler’s insights, it will be argued that the official texts relating to section 14 problematically construct the subject of prostitution in a way which maintains and perpetuates certain partial and idealised identities. However, it will be argued that the law will inevitably fail and that more inclusive and productive measures need to be adopted in order to deal effectively with prostitution.     

All Bark and No Bite: Notes on the Federal Constitutional Court's 'Banana Decision'

The Federal Constitutional Court's banana decision of 7 June 2000 continues the complex theme of national fundamental‐rights control over Community law. Whereas in the ‘Solange II’ decision (BVerfGE 73, 339) the Federal Constitutional Court had lowered its standard of review to the general guarantee of the constitutionally mandatorily required minimum, the Maastricht judgment (BVerfGE 89, 155) had raised doubts as to the continued validity of this case law. In the banana decision, which was based on the submission of the EC banana market regulation by the Frankfurt‐am‐Main administrative court for constitutional review, the Federal Constitutional Court has now confirmed the ‘Solange II’decision and restrictively specified the admissibility conditions for constitutional review of Community law as follows. Constitutional complaints and judicial applications for review of European legislation alleging fundamental‐rights infringements are inadmissible unless they show that the development of European law including Court of Justice case law has since the ‘Solange II’ decision generally fallen below the mandatorily required fundamental‐rights standard of the Basic Law in a given field. This would require a comprehensive comparison of European and national fundamental‐rights protection. This paper criticises this formula as being logically problematic and scarcely compatible with the Basic Law. Starting from the position that national constitutional courts active even in European matters should be among the essential vertical ‘checks and balances’ in the European multi‐level system, a practical alternative to the Federal Constitutional Court's retreat is developed. This involves at the first stage a submission by the Federal Constitutional Court to the Court of Justice, something that in the banana case might have taken up questions on the method of fundamental‐rights review and the internal Community effect of WTO dispute settlement decisions. Should national constitutional identity not be upheld even by this, then at a second stage, as ultima ratio taking recourse to general international law, the call is made for the decision of constitutional conflicts by an independent mediating body.     

The Heathrow Case in the Supreme Court: Climate Change Legislation and Administrative Adjudication

In R (on the application of Friends of the Earth Ltd and others) v Heathrow Airport Ltd the UK Supreme Court allowed an appeal against the Court of Appeal's decision that there had been a series of legal errors in the designation of the Airport National Policy Statement. This case note analyses the case from an ‘internal’ doctrinal perspective and argues that the Supreme Court could have engaged more explicitly with the legal issues that arise from climate change legislation for administrative law adjudication. For courts to adjudicate well in such circumstances they need to be prepared to develop administrative law doctrine, particularly in light of the issues of integrating climate change into public decision-making and of scientific/policy uncertainty which lie in the background of climate change legislation.     

Prosecuting and Defending Diplomats as War Criminals: Ribbentrop at the Nuremberg Trials

This article considers the question of holding foreign ministers responsible for war crimes. A recent decision by the International Court of Justice, the Arrest Warrant case, Congo v Belgium, appears to have diluted the developing international customary rule that suspends immunity when a grave international crime has been committed. This article suggests that the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal decision in the Ribbentrop Case constitutes a precedent for how international criminal law should interpret the nature and scope of the immunity for foreign ministers. As a successful prosecution of Hitler’s former foreign minister, it is remarkable how little attention has been paid to this aspect of the Ribbentrop Case given that it was a path-breaking decision. For that reason, the present article is a case study of this example where prosecutors at an international criminal tribunal were able to successfully prosecute a foreign minister in a manner that may, therefore, still prove instructive given the existing legal position following the Arrest Warrant Case. The article considers in detail how Ribbentrop’s defence lawyers constructed a series of arguments that the prosecution were, however, largely able to demolish through resort to a variety of strategies. Dr Michael Salter is Professor of Law at the Lancashire Law School, University of Central Lancashire, United Kingdom; Dr Lorie Charlesworth is Senior Lecturer at the Law School, Liverpool John Moores University, United Kingdom.     

Integrating Environmental Protection and EU Competition Law: Why Competition Isn't Special

One of the biggest challenges facing environmental policy makers at present is that of integrating environmental protection goals into economic policy areas. Unless this is genuinely achieved, it is clear that environmental degradation will continue apace. Though one of the EU's most important areas of economic competence is competition policy, many policy makers and commentators reject the notion that environmental concerns should play a significant role in EU competition analysis. In that light, this article addresses two key questions. First, should this approach apply? Second, if not, what are the principles that govern how environmental protection requirements should be taken into account by decision makers applying EU competition law? In answering these questions, the article puts forward three theoretical arguments as to why, and how, the environmental benefits and damage flowing from goods and services should be taken into account by EU competition decision makers, based, respectively, on legal systematic, governance and economic reasoning.     

Marriage and Divorce in the Supreme Court and the Law Commission: for Love or Money?

The case note considers the impact of the Supreme Court decision in Radmacher v Granatino regarding pre‐nuptial and other classes of nuptial agreement, together with recent proposals of the Law Commission for reform of the law relating to marital property agreements generally. It explores in particular the question of what, if any, core obligations of marriage cannot – or should not – be excludable by agreement.     

Freedom of Speech in Union Representation Elections: Employer Campaigning and Employee Response

In 1977 the National Labor Relations Board announced that it would no longer probe the truth or falsity of statements made in the course of representation campaigns. This decision, Shopping Kart Ford Market, overruled longstanding Board policy and was itself overruled the following year. Now, in August of 1982, the Board has again made a commitment to nonprobing and has reinstated the Shopping Kart standard (Midland National Life Insurance Co.,___ N.L.R.B.____, 110 L.R.R.M. 1489 (1982)). Such seesawing of Board positions suggests the difficulty of attempting to protect freedom of speech while simultaneously supporting other national labor policy goals, including employee freedom of choice and the integrity of representation elections. Critical to determining the appropriate standard for campaign speech is an understanding of how employees respond to misrepresentations or coercion in an employer's campaign rhetoric. This paper investigates the relationship between employer campaigning and employee response. Both employer and labor organization will have incentives to prevent coercive or misrepresentative speech at certain levels of violation severity. But in an intermediate range of speech in which that is not the case, the Board has a unique role to play in protecting the rights of individual employees and the public interest in the integrity of elections.     

The JK Rowling photo case – Are privacy rights evolving for the online era?

The Court of Appeal's recent decision in the case brought on behalf of JK Rowling's young son has some important implications for the developing law of privacy in the UK (David Murray (by his litigation friends Neil Murray and Joanne Murray) v Big Pictures Limited [2008] EWCA Civ 446). Most strikingly, the court's approach shows that the scope of potentially private information is broader than previously thought.The claim brought was for breach of confidence, misuse of private information and under the Data Protection Act 1998 (“the DPA”) and resulted from a photograph of JK Rowling's son, taken covertly in a public place, being published in a newspaper.The decision is significant for photographers and newspaper publishers, in particular, because it suggests that more types of information, especially photographs, may be capable of protection as “private”. It does not follow, however, that this development will prejudice freedom of expression: the balance between privacy and press freedom still needs to be struck, with neither taking precedence over the other.