论国际商会国际仲裁院裁决的国籍

尽管国际商会国际仲裁院设在法国巴黎,但是由该院管理的适用该院仲裁规则做出的裁决,并不当然具有法国的国籍,因为确定国际商事仲裁裁决的国籍主要标准是仲裁地点。根据ICC仲裁规则,仲裁地点可以由当事人约定,也可以由仲裁院决定,而无论是当事人约定还是仲裁院决定的仲裁地点,可以在法国,也可以是法国以外的国家和地区。因此,ICC仲裁院的仲裁庭适用该院仲裁规则做出的ICC裁决的国籍,取决于特定仲裁案件所涉及的法律意义上的仲裁地点所在国,而不是仲裁机构所在的国家。     

Who is steering the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice? The influence of Member State submissions on copyright law

The juridification of the European policy process is increasingly fragile, and little understood. This study develops a novel methodology to investigate the influence of Member States on the rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The focus is on the domain of copyright law which has seen a dramatic escalation of preliminary references to the Court, indicating a normative void. Examining 170 documents relating to 42 cases registered between 1998 and 2015, we measure empirically the impact of submissions by Member States and the European Commission on the interpretation of copyright concepts. We show that France is the most influential country by some distance, both in terms of the number of interventions (an ‘investment’ in policy) and in terms of persuasive power (arguments adopted by the Court). The evidence also suggests that the departure of the UK from EU litigation will disturb the delicate balance of CJEU jurisprudence.     

The Examining Magistrate’s Function and Involvement in Investigative Matters

This article gives a brief overview of the division of roles during the investigative stage between Court, Public Prosecution Service (PPS) and Police. It explains the role either an Examining Magistrate or an Investigative Judge plays in Croatia, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Spain, presenting his/her functions and involvement in criminal investigation and especially focussing on which actions require his/her approval.     

错误的生命之诉的法律适用

错误的生命之诉是近年来出现的一种新型诉讼。目前,法国、美国五个州的最高法院准许了原告就此提起的财产损害赔偿请求,而英国、美国19个州的最高法院、加拿大的两个省、德国联邦宪法法院均驳回了原告的损害赔偿请求。但实际上,全部或部分驳回原告方诉讼请求所持的理由并不成立,原告的确受到了侵害,受侵害的客体是拥有充分知情的父母的利益。     

法国土地征收公益性审查机制及其对中国的启示

在法国,只有国家可以为了公共利益的需要征收私人土地,并且按照司法最终原则,由行政法官判断土地征收的公用目的性。最高行政法院在长期审判实践中形成了"损益对比分析理论"。该理论的应用加强了对土地征收公用目的宣告行为司法审查的力度。在加强对行政机关裁量权司法监督的同时,损益对比分析机制并未超越行政行为合法性审查的界限,它为行政机关在多个合法方案间自由选择保留了足够的裁量空间。     

法官公开法律见解义务探析

法官的法律见解向来被认为是审判秘密的范畴。自20世纪70年代以来。德、法等国家的民事诉讼立法规定法官有公开法律见解的义务，以保障当事人的程序主体地位。我国最高院在司法解释中对此也作出了类似规定，但由于理论研究的不足。该规定较为笼统，实践中也难以把握，需要进一步研究和完善。     

The choice of child delivery is a European human right

In a judgment of 14 December 2010, in the case of Madam Ternovszky v. Hungary, the European Court of Human Rights has considered that a State should provide an adequate regulatory scheme concerning the right to choose in matters of child delivery (at home or in a hospital). In the context of homebirth, regarded as a matter of personal choice of the mother, this implies that the mother is entitled to a legal and institutional environment that enables her choice. This contribution stresses in which sense the regulatory schemes in the Member States Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, France and the UK concerning the choice of child delivery are in accordance with Article 8 ECHR, the right to respect for the private life. Do the Member States provide the legal certainty to a mother that the midwife can legally assist a homebirth? Or are restrictions made in interests of public health?     

The National Judiciary—Sword of European Court of Justice Rulings: The Example of the Kohll/Decker Jurisprudence

The role of the national judiciary in enforcing EC law, and particularly European Court of Justice (ECJ) rulings, has been largely neglected by empirical legal and political science research. Existing research has categorised the role of the national judiciary as either shielding national legislation from the ECJ or as serving as a ‘sword’ to foster integration and to force change on reluctant governments. This article sides with the second assumption and attempts to empirically assess it using the example of the patient mobility jurisprudence by the ECJ, the so‐called Kohll/Decker jurisprudence. The three case studies on France, the UK and Germany show that national courts played an important role in overcoming the resistance against this jurisprudence: via a multiplication of national court cases that contradicted domestic legislation they forced the legislator to end judicial uncertainty.     

Trade mark use in transit: EU-phony or cacophony?

Legal context The present article discusses the opinion of Advocate-GeneralJacobs in Case C-405/05 Class International BV v Unilever NVand others, according to which trade mark owners cannot opposethe entry into the European Union of grey market non-Communitygoods placed in external transit, on the grounds of Article5(1) of the Trade Mark Directive, or any equivalent provision,as such entry does not constitute trade mark use. Key points We examine the consistency of this approach withprior case law of the European Court of Justice, namely in theCommission v France, Rioglass, The Polo/Lauren and Rolex casesand draw a parallelism with Council Regulation (EC) 1383/2003. Practical significance We conclude that trade mark owners shouldbe allowed to prohibit the placing in transit of goods whichwould infringe an intellectual property right under the lawof the transit country, unless the owner or consignor of thelitigious goods can undeniably prove that the goods are notdestined for the internal market. Stop press. At the end of the article the authors provide abrief analysis of the European Court of Justice's decision of18th October 2005 in this case.     

Congressional Attacks on the Supreme Court: A Mechanism to Maintain,Build, and Consolidate

Reexamination and reinterpretation of the “mature” (1955–1984) New Deal era of congressional attacks on the Supreme Court reveals a new hypothesis: that Court‐curbing efforts played a previously unrecognized role in party system development. Court rulings that create inter‐ and intraparty tension provide opportunities for various actors to attack the Court in an effort to solidify their faction's standing within national coalitional politics. Congressional attackers can use Court‐curbing resolutions and amendments in efforts to help them maintain coalitional cohesion, build a new majority, or consolidate previous victories. Thus, we might see legislative‐judicial relations as an unrecognized “site” of political development, where coalitional change is opposed and wrought.     

论证券欺诈民事案件的诉讼方式

针对证券市场上在信息公开方面存在的严重问题 ,最高人民法院作出司法解释 ,宣布受理虚假陈述民事赔偿案件 ,但是由于其固守传统的民事诉讼模式 ,难以有效地解决人数众多的证券民事赔偿案件。笔者认为 ,应当借鉴美国的集团诉讼机制以及德、法两国团体诉讼的先进经验 ,改造我国已有的代表人诉讼制度 ,以解决证券欺诈民事案件的诉讼方式问题。     

A contractual model of the voting behavior of the supreme court: The role of the chief justice

Political scientists have long debated the role of the Supreme Court in public policymaking. Much of the debate has centered around the issue of judicial independence from political factors. Despite a rather extensive debate in the literature, the question of independence has rarely been subjected to systematic testing. This paper examines the role of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in linking decisions of the Court to the desires of Congress. Specifically, the paper focuses on the role of the Supreme Court Chief Justice as an agent of Congress that reacts to budgetary signals sent by the Congress. The resulting relationship between budgets allocated to the Court and decisions reached by the Court are analyzed from 1946 to 1988.     

Restraining the Court: Assessing Accounts of Congressional Attempts to Limit Supreme Court Authority

We propose a multilevel account of legislative Court curbing in order to assess existing explanations as to why such proposals come about. We argue that although Court curbing is commonly seen as the result of institutional conflict between Congress and the Supreme Court, it is best understood as a product of three interrelated factors: the individual motivations on the part of lawmakers, the partisan context in which they operate, and institutional disagreements between Court and legislature. We find evidence that micro‐level factors offer an important insight into Court curbing that institution‐focused explanations alone cannot.     

The Influence of Congressional Preferences on Legislative Overrides of Supreme Court Decisions

Studies of Court–Congress relations assume that Congress overrides Court decisions based on legislative preferences, but no empirical evidence supports this claim. Our first goal is to show that Congress is more likely to pass override legislation the further ideologically removed a decision is from pivotal legislative actors. Second, we seek to determine whether Congress rationally anticipates Court rejection of override legislation, avoiding legislation when the current Court is likely to strike it down. Third, most studies argue that Congress only overrides statutory decisions. We contend that Congress has an incentive to override all Court decisions with which it disagrees, regardless of their legal basis. Using data on congressional overrides of Supreme Court decisions between 1946 and 1990, we show that Congress overrides Court decisions with which it ideologically disagrees, is not less likely to override when it anticipates that the Court will reject override legislation, and acts on preferences regardless of the legal basis of a decision. We therefore empirically substantiate a core part of separation‐of‐powers models of Court–Congress relations, as well as speak to the relative power of Congress and the Court on the ultimate content of policy.     

The Islamic Headscarf: An Example of Surmountable Conflict between Sharî'a and the Fundamental Principles of Europe1

Abstract: The demand by certain Muslims living in Europe to wear the Islamic headscarf has led to important cases, before the courts of the Member States of the Union as much as before the European Court of Human Rights, above all with regard to public education. The Court of Human Rights and the Member States have taken different positions concerning the licitness of wearing the headscarf. The solutions adopted are, in fact, strongly influenced by the classical concept of relations between Church and State. In schools in Germany, where a relationship of cooperation exists between Church and State, the wearing of the veil is allowed, but only for the pupils, not for their teachers. In France, which has a model of strict separation between Church and State, neither teachers nor pupils are allowed to wear the veil. The tensions linked to wearing of the headscarf are but one example of conflict between sharî'a and the fundamental principles of Europe. These conflicts are not insurmountable. However, they do require efforts from both sides. The EU and the Member States must break with discriminatory practices against Muslims. The Muslims of Europe must construct a ‘European Islam’, re‐reading sacred texts in light of the characteristics and the values of the European societies in which they live.     

Mutual Bonds: Media Frames and the Israeli High Court of Justice

This study examines the coverage of the Supreme Court of Israel functioning as the High Court of Justice (HCJ) in the popular and elite press over a period marked by growing activism of the Israeli Supreme Court and an increasingly adversarial and critical media. Our results show that more prominent coverage of the HCJ over time, especially in the elite press, accentuates the salience of the Supreme Court in public life. In addition, the topics, the stages of the HCJ proceedings, the petitioners, and the outcome of the cases covered by the press, as well as the generally uncritical reporting of the Court decisions help create the frame of an autonomous, powerful Court that frequently opposes and restrains the government. We suggest that this pattern of media coverage of the HCJ benefits both the Court and the media: it reinforces the image of the media as a critical watchdog of the government, while at the same time it legitimates the Court's expansion of power and strengthens its image as an apolitical and independent institution.     

Geographical indications outside the European Regulation on PGIs, and the rule of the free movement of goods: lessons from cases judged by the Court of Justice of the European Communities

Several recent cases judged by the Court of Justice of the European Communities (the Court) have raised interesting issues related to the possibility for operators of food chains to use national quality signs to indicate territory of origin, which are different from the regulatory European ??Protected Geographical Indications??. The various attempts by France (a list of quality signs), Germany (??Markenqualit?t aus deutschen Landen?? sign) and Belgium (??Walloon?? sign) have all been condemned as protectionist policies contradicting the free movement of goods in the European Market. These national quality signs can be seen as attempt to defend the viability of specific kinds of activities (involving small enterprises) in specific places (rural areas). These cases are a good illustration of the difficulties that a Member State of the European Communities (Member State) faces in trying to protect its traditional activities and/or rural areas in a way that is compatible with free markets. The paper analyses the recent court decisions underlining economic aspects such as information delivery and the cost of alternative protection mechanisms for these activities. We highlight in particular the collective trademarks and the kind of intellectual property right they form by the economic theory of clubs, and make some comparisons with protected geographical indications.     

死刑控制与最高人民法院的功能定位

死刑控制与最高人民法院的关系是社会各界关注的热点问题。分析表明,2007年以来最高人民法院全面收回死刑复核权,对其自身造成了一系列影响;最高人民法院的内部结构与实际功能,由此发生了深刻变化。这些变化并不完全符合现代法治理念下最高人民法院的功能定位。未来应该在考虑政治与社会条件的基础上,有步骤地改造最高人民法院在死刑控制方面的工作职能与方式,以减轻最高人民法院不必要的工作负担与资源消耗,促进最高人民法院将更多的资源用于应对更加宏观、复杂的问题。     

IsTeen Court effective for repeat offenders? A test of the restorative justice approach

Teen Courts are an effective judicial alternative for many youth offenders. The majority of youth courts deal solely with first-time offenders. However, repeat offenders are at a greater risk for future crime. Is Teen Court effective with more experienced offenders? In this study, the authors examine the outcomes of 26 Whatcom County Teen Court offenders with at least one prior conviction. The sentence completion rate was higher and the recidivism was lower for the Teen Court offenders when compared with a sample of first-time Court Diversion offenders. This objective evidence of program success is augmented by an offender's perspective on his or her court experience. These perspectives as well as the continued voluntary involvement with Teen Court are discussed in relation to empowerment theory.     

论虚假陈述民事案件的诉讼方式

在民众的强烈期盼下,最高人民法院终于做出司法解释宣布受理虚假陈述民事赔偿案件,但是由于其固守传统民事诉讼模式,难以有效地解决人数众多的虚假陈述民事赔偿问题。笔者认为应当借鉴美国的集团诉讼机制以及德、法两国的团体诉讼的先进经验,改造我国已有的代表人诉讼制度,以解决虚假陈述民事案件的诉讼方式问题。