国家所有权法学诱析

所有权是私法上的概念,而国家所有权兼有公法及私法上的特性,这使得研究国家所有权变得复杂。文章以国家所有权概念为切入点,分析国家所有权的主体、客体、内容、行使及国家所有权保护等相关内容,旨在丰富我国国家所有权理论,以期有益于我国今后的物权立法和国有资产管理体制改革之实践。     

虚拟财产权的法律性质探析

关于虚拟财产的法律性质,目前主要有否定说、物权说、知识产权说、无形财产说、债权说、新型权利说六种观点。从理论上评析,这六种学说均有不足,虚拟财产符合财产的有效用、稀缺性、合法性等基本属性,属于法律意义上的财产。虚拟财产权既是一种固化了的权利凭证,有权请求运营商提供相应的服务,又不需要对运营商进行任何通知或为其他意思表示而任意处分,因此,它具有债权属性与物权特性。     

The Proprietary Foundations of Corporate Law

Recent work in both the theory of the firm and of corporatelaw has called into question the appropriateness of analysingcorporate law as ‘merely’ a set of standard formcontracts. This article develops these ideas by focusing onproperty law's role in underpinning corporate enterprise. Rightsto control assets are a significant mechanism of governancein the firm. However, their use in this way predicates somearrangement for stipulating which parties will have controlunder which circumstances. It is argued that ‘propertyrules’—a category whose scope is determined functionally—protectthe entitlements of parties to such sharing arrangements againsteach other's opportunistic attempts to grant conflicting entitlementsto third parties. At the same time, the legal system uses arange of strategies to minimize the costs such protection imposeson third parties. The choice of strategy significantly affectsco-owners’ freedom to customize their control-sharingarrangements. This theory is applied to give an account of the‘proprietary foundations’ of corporate law, whichhas significant implications for the way in which the subject'sfunctions are understood and evaluated.     

中国企业赴美并购的法律风险及其防范对策

中国企业在赴美并购过程中总存在着各种各样的法律风险。中国国有企业赴美并购时应高度重视美国的国家安全审查机制,清晰地突出国有企业的商事主体性质。而美国外资委员会引入听证会程序,应充分听取中国投资者的意见,放弃投资保护主义。中国企业要熟悉美国的公司并购规则与治理规则,明确目标公司选择符合本公司及其股东利益最大化的收购要约而并非现金出价最多的要约,是美国公司并购的常态。中美双方加快双边投资保护协定的谈判进程,就企业的国有化条款而言,应采取充分的市场化补偿标准。我国政府鼓励企业赴美并购,可将核准制改为备案制。要加快建立健全海外投资纠纷的仲裁机制,提高我国仲裁机构的国际竞争力。     

论“入宪”后私有财产权法律保护制度的再完善——对2004年修改后的宪法第13条的再思考

必须正确认识“社会主义公有财产神圣不可侵犯”和“公民的合法的私有财产不受侵犯”两个规定之间的关系。财产权保护的法理依据应当是财产取得方式的合法性而不是“所有制”的优越性。有关私有财产权保障的条款应置于公民的基本权利部分而非总则的“基本经济制度”部分。立法上完善配套法律法规时要既体现“平等保护原则,”又处理好转型时期的“特殊问题”。为增强法律实效,实践中应有效限制行政权力,进一步放宽对私营企业市场准入限制。培植尊重私产和正当程序的宪政观念,深化政治体制改革,建立真正的社会公正,兼顾自由竞争与公平分配,对完善宪政意义上的私有财产权制度非常重要。     

论所有权的概念

所有权人对物享有的包括占有、使用、收益、处分在内的全部权能,实际上都是所有权人自由支配力的反映。"所有"的含义是法律上排除他人,将某项财产据为己有,由己独占的归属权。因此,自由支配性和归属性是所有权概念的内涵。由自由支配性所产生的支配力是所有人行使所有权的意志体现,由归属性所反映的归属力是法律保护所有权的必然结果。两者和谐统一,共同揭示出所有权的本质属性。     

Local Venues for Change: Legal Strategies for Healthy Environments

Mounting evidence documents the extraordinary toll on human health resulting from the consumption of unhealthy food products and physical inactivity. In response to America's growing obesity problem, local policymakers have been looking for legal strategies that can be adopted in their communities to encourage healthful behaviors. In order to provide practical tools to policymakers, this article examines four possible venues for local policy change to improve the health of a community: (1) the school environment (2) the built environment (3) community facilities and (4) the point of sale environment. Finally, the article examines the use of taxes or fees as a means of paying for nutrition policy work as well as potentially reducing the consumption of unhealthy products. This article illustrates that local laws and policies can be a valuable tool in changing a community's environment in order to improve nutritional options and increase opportunities for physical activity.     

作品原件所有权与作品著作权相冲突之法律思考

作品原件所有权与作品著作权之间的法律冲突,是以作品原件为焦点,以争夺对作品的实际控制为内涵的权利冲突.在进行充分的利益衡量的前提下,谋求权利间的相互限制与让步,不仅是解决这类权利冲突的基本原则,而且是协调现代法治社会中众多法律冲突的应有之义.     

法律方法:法律认知之根本

在我国 ,法律方法论一直是一门处于边缘位置、发展迟缓落后的学科 ,主要原因在于 ,人们始终把法律方法论作狭义的理解 ,对其角色的工具性、实用性定位 ,在观念上的单一陈旧 ,严重制约和影响着对法律方法论理论体系的建构。法律方法论要从困境中走出来 ,必须进行检讨与重构。     

网络法律信息资源的检索策略

网络法律信息资源有自己的组织方式和特点，掌握网络资源目录、网络搜索引擎两种常用的网络信息搜索工具及其使用方法，就能更好地检索法律信息资源。     

从所有权的视角解析人本主义与中国古代民事法律规范之关系

人本主义对中国古代民事法律规范中的所有权的影响是最为突出、最为久远和最具特色的.中国古代法律涉及的所有权,主要是指财产所有人依法对财产的占有、使用、收益和处分权.保护所有权的法律虽较为零散、缺乏系统性和完整性,但由于其具有某些明显的民法特征,特别是表现出一定的以人为本的人本主义特色,使这些各种形式的法律规定显得弥足珍贵.人本主义影响下的法律制度保护私人不动产的重点是保护相对弱势群体--自耕农的土地所有权和平等地保护官府与私人动产的所有权.     

The Liability Rule,Proprietary Remedies and Body Parts

Sometimes courts and commentators disavow a proprietary approach to excised body parts in the belief that non-proprietary remedies are adequate to the task. A belief of this sort, this type of conceptual resistance to the application of property law to body parts, is allegedly captured in the compendious expression known as the liability rule. Moore v Regents of the University of California clearly illustrates this type of opposition. Some recent scholarship has also tried to ground this sort of exclusive non-proprietary approach to body parts in the liability rule component of the analytical framework developed by Calabresi and Melamed. This piece interrogates the idea that nonproprietary causes of action should exclusively furnish the applicable theory of liability in relation to body parts; it suggests an understanding of the theoretical framework of Calabresi and Melamed which facilitates a proprietary approach to body parts along with current non-proprietary approaches. I argue that property, liability and inalienability rules basically serve the same purpose (protection of an entitlement in the nature of a property interest) and that the difference amongst them is one of degree rather than nature; also, none of the triad applies separately and independently of one another. Thus, I suggest that the liability rule is not essentially non-proprietary and could be used to protect a proprietary entitlement. I tested my understanding of Calabresi and Melamed’s framework against a case that involved damaged kidney in order to show the difference the framework, as conceived by me, could make to the remedial fortunes of a claimant in body parts’ litigation.