违约金调减的证明责任问题

在对《民法典》第585条第2款后段的解读中,应将"违约金过分高于损失"理解为违约金调减请求的权利成立要件,将法官自由裁量权的行使理解为权利成立的法律后果。这一区分对应了违约金的双重功能,可为违约金调减请求提供更清晰的审理思路。成立要件的审理对应违约金的补偿性功能,适用诉讼法理;调减衡量因素的审理对应违约金的履约压力功能,部分适用非讼法理。根据现行法,"违约金过分高于损失"的证明责任应由违约方承担,且不能转移。违约方的证明困难属于法官自由心证的范畴,在具体诉讼中可以通过事案解明义务缓解,但不改变证明责任、证明标准以及由此决定的本证与反证的区分。违约金调减衡量因素的调查不存在证明责任问题,应围绕法官自由裁量权的行使,在诉讼法理与非讼法理的交错适用中展开。     

法官释明权与我国民事诉讼模式转换相关问题的思考

一、法官释明权 法官释明权是一个与职权主义诉讼模式与生俱来的概念。主要是指,在诉讼过程中,法官在当事人的主张、请求或陈述的意思不明确、不充分、不适当的情况下,依法对当事人进行询问、提醒、启发或要求当事人对上述事项作出解释和说明的权限。它具有以下法律特征:(一) 行使释明权主体必须是法官,其他任何人对     

论民事诉讼中法官释明权的规范行使

法官释明权的规范行使有利于实现实体和程序公正,提高司法效率,减少了当事人的诉累.但法官在司法实践中对释明权难以把握,导致释明权行使不适当、不统一.本文通过两起典型的实例反映出民事诉讼中释明权行使中存在的问题,主要表现为怠于行使、错误行使和过度行使释明权.总结其原因为:立法缺陷难把握、法官素质难匹配和监督机制的缺失.在此基础上提出了民事诉讼中法官释明权规范行使的相应建议,即明确释明权操作规范;提升法官整体素质;完善案例指导制度;建立监督和救济机制.     

对抗与和谐——谈法官的释明权

释明权制度对修正辩论主义的形骸化、明确当事人之间的诉讼关系,进而实现公平地解决纠纷发挥着重要作用.法官的释明包括消极的释明和积极的释明,释明内容主要为请求内容的释明、请求原因的释明、证明促使以及法律观点的指明等.目前,在如何行使释明权以及行使程度和范围等方面还没有一个统一的标准,一些问题主要靠判例来解决.我国的民事诉讼中尚未引入释明权制度,因此,对该制度的探讨和研究具有一定的现实意义.     

论法官释明权的正当行使

法官释明权制度存在的合理基础是通过强化法官的程序控制功能,对完全当事人主义民事诉讼模式的缺陷进行限制与修正.本文拟通过梳理两大法系法官释明权的形成历史,从历史视角揭示法官释明权与当事人主义诉讼模式的必然联系;通过阐释法官释明权正当行使的理论依据,从理论方面论证法官释明权设立之必要性和正当行使之必要性;通过分析我国法官释明权制度面临的两大冲突,从实证角度考察我国法官释明权制度面临的困境;最后探讨我国法官释明权正当行使的路径,试图为构建中国法官释明权正当行使的基本制度作出努力.     

浅议法官释明权的行使

法官释明权包含两方面的内容,积极释明权和消极释明权。从审理到执行各个阶段法官释明的内容各有侧重和不同。释明权对当事人无拘束效力。法官怠于行使释明权以及滥用释明权都会产生相应的法律效果。     

试析民事审判中的法官释明权

恰当行使释明权是体现法官司法能力的重要指标之一。本文对释明权的性质、范围、方式等问题作了初步探讨,指出在民事审判中,法官行使释明权应该在坚持中立原则的基础上,以公开、公正的方式去探知双方当事人的真实意思表示,对当事人双方的专业技能、法律知识、诉讼经验、经济能力等方面进行深入的体察,以实现诉讼为目的,平等地保护当事人的诉讼权利。     

论民商事案件中法官释明权的正当行使

法官释明权在我国民商事案件中的确立，是我国民商事案件诉讼程序追一步完善的一种体现。法官释明权的行使与否以及行使是否适当，将对诉讼当事人的权利义务产生实质性的影响。本文即从保护诉讼当事人权利的角度出发，论述民商事案件中法官释明权的行使问题。     

浅议法官释明权的行使

在法治社会下,法官释明权已经成为民事诉讼的重要的法律制度。传统上,法官有对当事人行使发问的权利,尽可能地查清案件的真实情况,如果当事人未主动阐明案件的详细情况,法官有权介入。法官释明权的使用是否得当,直接影响了诉讼效率与诉讼结果。     

论民事诉讼中的法官释明权

释明权是大陆法系当事人主义诉讼模式下的产物,是对完全当事人诉讼模式的固有缺陷进行的限制和修正,避免了过分强调当事人的作用所带来的诉讼迟延,实体不公等弊端。在我国民诉模式转变过程中,由于当事人诉讼能力欠缺,诉讼中如果没有法官的指引,易造成对突袭裁判的怀疑和对法院不信任,甚至会引起当事人的不断缠诉。相反,若法官行驶释明权,则案件很可能走向另一个结果,从而更好地实现司法公正。虽然目前我国最高法院的司法解释中有若干释明权的规定,但这离释明权制度本身的建构相差甚远,无论法学界和实务界对释明权的理解及做法都缺乏统一尺度,因此,本文试在我国民诉模式改革的过程中探讨如何建构完善的释明权制度。     

流浪乞讨与管制--从贫困救助看中央与地方权限的界定

随着《收容遣送办法》的废止,个人自由权利与社会治安秩序之间的现实冲突比过去更为突显。应转变中央和地方关系的传统思维,在允许地方更多自主权和选择权的同时,更充分地保障公民个人的宪法基本权利。无论是中央和地方关系的法律界定,还是公民权利的宪法保障,都要求建立独立的司法机构以审查地方立法的有效性。     

Implementing and evaluating crime prevention and control programs and policies

The history of crime prevention and control efforts in the United States has demonstrated little progressive improvement in our ability to deter crime. The major obstacles to implementing effective interventions and policies have been a weak scientific knowledge base about how to prevent crime, the research community's inability to effectively disseminate what is known about the causes of crime and to translate this knowledge into operational programs and policies, and a resistance on the part of practitioners and policy makers to evaluate programs and policies and to use this information in the development of new programs and policies. In the last decade, there have been major advances in our understanding about the causes of crime and we have now demonstrated the effectiveness of selected prevention programs. But there is little evidence that this scientific knowledge is informing current practice or policy. Problems in the dissemination of this information and the resistance to utilizing it remain. These problems are discussed and suggestions are made for addressing them. Our knowledge base remains modest, but it is now sufficient to inform policy and practice. The research community must work to do a better job of disseminating this information and overcoming the resistance to utilizing it before we will be successful in implementing effective crime prevention programs and policies. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

International aid,trade and investment and access and allocation

International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics - The access to goods and their allocation (who gets what, when, where and how) is one of the analytical problems of the 2009...     

Accommodation and Satisfaction: Women and Men Lawyers and the Balance of Work and Family

This study of graduates of the University of Michigan Law School from the late 1970s reports on the differing ways that women and men have responded to the conflicting claims of work and family. It finds that women with children who have entered the profession have indeed continued to bear the principal responsibilities for the care of children, but it also finds that these women, with all their burdens, are more satisfied with their careers and with the balance of their family and professional lives than other women and than men.     

真相与正义，探究与辩护，科学与法律

在美国法律文化塑造下的对抗制诉讼制度和科学的调查程序之间存在着紧张关系（tension），在法律所关注的裁决终局性（finality）和科学所追求的持续性纠错（oven—minded fallibilism）之间存在着紧张关系。长期以来，法律界都试图通过可采性法律规则归化科学证言，结果导致联邦法官担负起广泛的审查职责；近期，法庭指定专家的制度实践导致对抗制度做出某些修正，这种制度实践已经被批评为“带有纠问色彩”（inquisitorial），甚至“违背了民主的要求”（undemocratic）。在分析这些制度利弊的过程中，我们有必要考察其他法律系统的经验教训。     

油气储运防火安全分析及预防措施

本文主要从设备故障与维护、防静电、动火作业、执行操作规程等几个方面引起的爆炸和火灾进行分析,制定对应的防护措施。提出了以做好设备维护保养、防静电处理、做好防火设计及安全装置、落实动火作业措施及强化安全培训等方面进行综合防控,消除油气储运过程中引起的爆炸和火灾,以实现安全生产。     

Truth and Justice, Inquiry and Advocacy, Science and Law

Abstract. There is tension between the adversarialism of the U.S. legal culture and the investigative procedures of the sciences, and between the law's concern for finality and the open‐ended fallibilism of science. A long history of attempts to domesticate scientific testimony by legal rules of admissibility has left federal judges with broad screening responsibilities; recent adaptations of adversarialism in the form of court‐appointed experts have been criticized as “inquisitorial,” even “undemocratic.” In exploring their benefits and disadvantages, it would make sense to look to the experience of other legal systems.