Judicial Career Incentives and Court Performance: An Empirical Study of the German Labour Courts of Appeal

This paper examines how the organization of a civil-law judiciary—the German labour court system—shapes court performance. It is argued that civil-law judiciaries can be considered as internal labour markets in which the main incentive derives from career opportunities. Resulting hypotheses are tested on data for nine German Labour Courts of Appeal (Landesarbeitsgerichte) over the period 1980–1998. Two performance measures are computed: the confirmation rate and a productivity measure. The confirmation rate captures how often decisions are upheld in an appeal at the Federal Labour Court. Court productivity is measured by a score derived via data envelopment analysis (DEA) and includes as outputs the number of finished cases and the number of published decisions. Regression analyses show: Courts employing more judges with a Ph.D. are more productive, but write decisions that are less often confirmed by the Federal Labour Court. Courts employing judges with higher ex ante promotion probabilities are less productive and write decisions that are less often confirmed.JEL Classification: J45, K31, M12     

行政允诺的性质及其司法审查——基于对司法判决书的实证分析

随着服务型政府建设的推进,具有授益性、非强制性的行政允诺在实践中得到广泛运用。但鉴于理论上对行政允诺内涵、性质认定的模糊、司法审查实践的集体无意识,行政允诺置于混乱的漩涡当中。通过对行政允诺判决书的研读、梳理,发掘当前行政允诺司法审查存在的问题,对行政允诺内涵的重新界定、行政允诺案由区分标准的重塑,有序审理规则的构建,以期有效规制行政允诺行为。     

生态环境损害赔偿诉讼与环境民事公益诉讼关系实证研究

从对司法实践案例的实证分析来看,我国当前所构建的社会组织提起的环境民事公益诉讼、人民检察院提起的环境民事公益诉讼和环境行政公益诉讼、地方政府作为赔偿权利人提起的生态环境损害赔偿诉讼、人民检察院提起的刑事附带环境民事公益诉讼等诉讼类型,在诉讼程序衔接上存在冲突问题。基于生态环境损害赔偿制度和环境民事公益诉讼制度的性质,赔偿权利人提起生态环境损害赔偿诉讼应优先于社会组织提起的环境民事公益诉讼,社会组织对生态损害赔偿制度规定范围外部分的损害环境公共利益的行为,有权提起环境民事公益诉讼,对生态环境损害赔偿诉讼是补充。人民检察院在提起公诉时发现行为人污染或破坏生态环境损害环境公共利益时,应首先通知赔偿权利人并督促赔偿权利人在一定期间内履行与赔偿义务人就生态环境损害赔偿事宜进行磋商及磋商不成提起生态环境损害赔偿诉讼的职责。没有合理理由,赔偿权利人不提起生态环境损害赔偿诉讼的,人民检察院有权就同一损害生态环境的行为提起附带环境民事公益诉讼。     

《纽约公约》背景下我国对外国仲裁裁决承认及执行的实证研究

要确定外国仲裁裁决在中国承认与执行的真实状况,除了应考察我国实施国际商事仲裁司法监督实践中的外国仲裁裁决案件,还需要对在中国有过申请承认与执行外国仲裁裁决经历的亲历者们进行调查以获取调研数据。基于案例梳理和对所收集数据的统计分析,实证研究结果表明中国具有履行国际承诺的意愿与能力,但在外国仲裁裁决的执行效率、逃避履行的被执行人的监管、我国法院的司法公信力建设方面还需要进一步加强和完善。     

What Determines Judicial Prestige? An Empirical Analysis for Judges of the Federal Court of Australia

This article examines judicial citations to analyze the determinantsof judicial prestige in the Federal Court of Australia. Firstwe construct two alternative measures of judicial prestige forall current and retired judges of the Federal Court. Second,we regress these measures of judicial prestige on a series ofexplanatory variables covering age on appointment, appointinggovernment, prior experience, which law school the judge attended,how many law review articles the judge has published, gender,and tenure. We compare our results with those of previous studiesthat examine the determinants of judicial influence and prestigein courts in the United States and the High Court of Australia.One of the main contributions of the article is to provide evidencefrom an intermediate appellate court that can be used to testthe general application of findings as to what determines judicialprestige in the United States to courts in other countries withdifferent institutional frameworks.     

Drugs Prices and Systemic Violence: An Empirical Study

This study proposes an empirical analysis of the relation between the prices of illegal drugs and the use of violence to administrate the markets of illegal drugs. The study hypothesizes that the prices of illegal drugs affect the level of violent crime, since changes in profitability of the drugs’ markets affect the offenders’ expected utility of using violence to operate in these markets. An increase (or decrease) in prices would raise (or reduce) the offenders’ expected utility of making use of violence, for instance, to solve disputes over drugs, to conquer more market shares, to defend ones own market share, in short to make use of systemic violence (Goldstein, P.J. Journal of Drug Issues, 39:143–179, 1985). The study will analyze the relation between the dynamics of cocaine and heroin’s prices and systemic violence in the United States of America and in Europe over two decades. The correlational and inferential analyses do support the hypothesis for certain offenders’ profiles and certain murders’ circumstances.

Complementarity, Amnesties and Alternative Forms of Justice: Some Interpretative Guidelines for the International Criminal Court

The question to what extent amnesties and pardons may bar criminalinvestigations or prosecutions under the Statute of the InternationalCriminal Court (the Statute) has been left unresolved by theRome process. This essay seeks to develop some general guidelinesthat may help the Court to address this problem, should it arisein a specific case. It suggests four basic principles to dealwith the issue of amnesties and pardons: (i) the Court has interpretativeautonomy to decide whether an amnesty or a pardon is permissibleunder the Statute; (ii) exemptions from criminal responsibilityfor the core crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court byamnesties or pardons should generally be considered incompatiblewith the Statute; (iii) prosecution by states and by the Courtmay be limited to the most serious crimes and the most responsibleperpetrators (targeted prosecution); (iv) amnesties or pardonsshould, if it all, only be permitted in exceptional cases, namelywhere they are conditional and accompanied by alternative formsof justice.     

Judicial Independence, Judicial Promotion and the Enforcement of Legislative Wealth Transfers—An Empirical Study of the New Zealand High Court

This paper investigates the Landes-Posner thesis on judicial independence using data on public law decisions in which the government was the defendant decided in the New Zealand High Court over the period 1958–2001. We use survival analysis to examine whether successive New Zealand governments have promoted judges from the High Court to the Court of Appeal (which stands above the High Court) on the basis of political considerations, the quality of the judge's decision-making or both. Our findings suggest that the quality of decision-making has generally been important. Consistent with the weak form of the Landes-Posner hypothesis we find no evidence that governments have used their powers to punish judges who decided cases against them. On the contrary, we find some support for the strong form of the Landes-Posner thesis that governments positively use their powers to secure judicial independence.     

实践中的刑事一审期限:期间耗费与功能探寻——以S省两个基层法院为主要样板

透过审限耗费角度的实证研究可以发现,我国基层法院刑事审判程序具有如下特征:庭前程序的"事务化",庭前程序沦为纯粹的案件管理活动;庭审程序的"速审化",庭审时间耗费少,庭审节奏明快;庭后程序的"中心化"与"间隔化"。传统观点认为,我国刑事审限制度具有人权保障和效率提升功能。通过比较和实证的考察发现,我国"贯通式"审限的真实功能为通过监控法官的审理行为,达到塑造与行政化司法制度结构相契合的审理主体的目的。     

Performance and Compensation: An Analysis of Contract Damages and Contractual Obligation

Although there is an increasing body of opinion that awardsof damages for breach of contract should take account of theclaimant’s performance interest, there has been littlein the way of analysis of what the performance interest is.Commonly the concept is put forward as simply a reformulationor reconceptualization of the expectation interest, itself hithertoregarded as the one true contractual interest. Such thinkingis flawed. A closer analysis of contract doctrine shows thereto be two distinct contractual interests; in receiving performance,and in being compensated for losses caused by non-performance.Receiving compensatory damages for non-performance is not thesame as receiving performance. At present, this important differenceis not fully appreciated, resulting in a failure to developa principled approach to the claims that can be made followinga breach of contract. Recognition of this distinction forcesus to confront the fundamental question of how committed weare to the notion that contracts entail a right to performance.This article examines the distinction between these two interests,how the performance interest may be given effect by a damagesaward, and what the consequences of this analysis are for ourunderstanding of the nature of contractual obligation.     

知识产权确认不侵权之诉受理条件实证研究

实证研究表明,司法实践中知识产权确认不侵权之诉的受理存在"受理条件规定并未被完全采纳、侵权警告形式及认定标准多样化、催告行使诉权要件适用差异化、当事人适格的影响因素复杂化"的困境。确认利益诉讼要件地位模糊、对确认利益缺乏具体化运用、法律缺位导致司法解释越位、司法解释规定较为简单粗略是造成前述困境的成因。解决前述困境,应当以确认利益理论为支撑。明确确认利益是诉讼要件而非起诉要件、以纠纷解决手段妥当性视角筛选侵权警告形式、以纠纷解决成熟性视角修正书面催告程序、以被告选择妥当性视角明确适格的当事人,最终实现对此种诉讼受理条件的重构。     

日本专利侵权损害赔偿计算若干问题研究及对我国的借鉴

自1998年日本《特许法》修改至今,日本有关专利侵权损害赔偿计算的司法实践开始出现一系列变化,特定权利人所失利润标准、侵权人非法获利标准及实施许可费标准作为确定损害赔偿额的主要方式获得了积极运用并采用了更为精细的计算方法,且随着司法判赔实践经验的逐步积累得到了不断发展.研究日本专利侵权损害赔偿制度中上述三种计算方式的适用条件、考量因素、规则细化问题及其新进展,以期对我国相关制度的完善有所助益.