诚信法律规制的完善——以我国劳动法律实施绩效的提高为视角

法律规制的“日臻完美”并没有使法治水平随之提高,而这不能不是诚信法律规制的不尽人意所致.弱势不是倾斜弱者的根据,更不是给予弱者——劳动者不诚信自由的理由,劳动法律关系主体在诚信上的差异并不是权利、义务上的,充其量只是责任上的、主客观诚信上的不同.诚信既是对不当劳动契约自由的限制,又是对得当劳动契约自由的保障,劳动法律规制得当及其有效实施不得不涉及自由与诚信关系的处理.诚信之帝王之位并不具有私法专属性,劳动法治更需要它.此外,为确保法律实施绩效,尚需提高诚信植入劳动法律的技术水平、尚需将诚信作为用人评价指标并使之法律化.     

浅析法律解释中的价值衡量

我们生活在法律的调控之中,以法律为准绳.马克思说:"法官的责任是当法律运用到个别场合时,根据他对法律的诚挚的理解来解释法律.""法律需要解释才能获得生命,这是不争的事实.然而,什么是解释却如同什么是法律一样令人困惑."这说明法律是普遍一般的规范,把法律适用于社会现实生活必然涉及对法律的解释.一般来说,法律解释会产生多种解释结果.对解释结果的多样性是司法过程中难以避免的问题,而这一问题是法律解释方法本身不能加以解决的.这就需要运用价值进行平衡.所以利益衡量或价值衡量是法律解释方法运用之后要接着运用的方法,在一定意义上,它决定法官自由裁量权的正确行使,左右着法律适用的进程中方法、工具的选择,决定着法律适用结论正确与否.     

浅析法律解释中的价值衡量

我们生活在法律的调控之中,以法律为准绳。马克思说：＂法官的责任是当法律运用到个别场合时,根据他对法律的诚挚的理解来解释法律。＂＂法律需要解释才能获得生命,这是不争的事实。然而,什么是解释却如同什么是法律一样令人困惑。＂这说明法律是普遍一般的规范,把法律适用于社会现实生活必然涉及对法律的解释。一般来说,法律解释会产生多种解释结果。对解释结果的多样性是司法过程中难以避免的问题,而这一问题是法律解释方法本身不能加以解决的。这就需要运用价值进行平衡。所以利益衡量或价值衡量是法律解释方法运用之后要接着运用的方法,在一定意义上,它决定法官自由裁量权的正确行使,左右着法律适用的进程中方法、工具的选择,决定着法律适用结论正确与否。     

解读诚信原则——关于诚实信用原则的法律思考

诚信不仅仅是道德观念 ,而更重要的它是法律规制。诚信原则既是我国社会主义市场经济的基本法则 ,又是我们从事国际经贸往来活动的通行证。然而 ,现阶段我们的诚信状况却不尽人意。其原因固然是多方面的 ,但从法律的角度来思考 ,则很大程度上与人们对诚信原则的法律本质及功能特点认识不清、把握不准有关。诚信原则乃道德准则的法律化 ,诚信本身就是法 ,“帝王规则”甲天下。     

法律的社会之维

庞德在对 19世纪的三大法学派进行批判性分析的基础上 ,提出了关于法律的社会工程解释理论。对法律性质、法律目的、法律秩序等问题以社会工程的广泛涵义进行了有效的分析界定     

法律与个人诚信决策

本文通过分析个人决策的预设条件,推定出人是自私理性的观点,为下面的分析提供了逻辑的起点。然后运用分析工具逐步得出,除法律之外,是否还有别的条件可以促使个人诚信决策和法律制度下个人如何诚信的结论。最后,强调法律制度对于诚实信用的积极作用。     

社会控制的法律之维

庞德作为社会法学派的奠基人和杰出代表,对于法律的认识有其独到之处,本文主要从庞德的代表作《通过法律的社会控制、法律的任务》入手简要考察了庞德的法律观,认为庞德以利益为法律发挥其作用的基点,将法律作为当代社会调整的主要手段,同时也强调由于法律的局限性,社会控制也离不开社会其他控制手段。     

《法律、立法与自由》评析

通过阅读哈耶克的《法律、立法与自由》(三卷本)，我在两个方面深有体会：一是宏观方面，即从整体上对哈耶克自由主义理论的认知和把握；二是具体方面，也就是哈耶克本书法律观中的很具特色的大社会与私法的关系。而这两部分内容是有内在联系的，在宏观方面我归纳出了哈耶克本书理论的前提，工具，发现和观念，在这些前提性认识的指导之下，大社会和私法的内在联系就可以推导而出。     

法律权威与法律信仰

现代国家无不提倡依法治国,民主法制,而且法律要求具有无限的权威。那么人们为什么要遵守法律,法律的权威来自何方呢？无论是古代西方的神权理论,还是古代东方的王权、专制都不能在当今这个科学、民主的社会中占主导地位,唯有人们从内心真正的对法律产生信仰,才是法律具有权威的原因。法律只有具有权威,才表明我们在法治进程中完成了第一步。     

李轩：要用法律约束任何不诚信的公务行为

政务诚信是社会诚信之本，政府及公务人员对诚信原则的遵守，将会在社会民众中起到示范和引领作用，有序推动社会前进的步伐。因此，加强诚信建设，要官民并治，重在治官。加强政务诚信，要法主德辅，以法立信。     

欧美行政法的热点问题与发展趋势

通过追踪美国联邦与欧洲联盟行政法的热点问题,本文探讨了欧美行政法的发展趋势及其对中国的意义。在全球化时代,当代行政法早已超越了传统的红灯论和绿灯论之间的狭隘对立,正在走向融合乃至趋同。如何根据国情构建适合自身需要的行政法体系、制度和过程,仍然是21世纪中国行政法学的当务之急。     

Principles, Values, and Rules in Legal Decision-Making and the Dimensions of Legal Rationality

Abstract. The author singles out various conceptions of rationality used in practical legal discourse: formal and substantive rationality, instrumental goal- and means-rationality, communicative rationality. Practical rationality is expressed in decisions justified by epistemic and axiological premises according to the rules of justificatory reasoning. Five levels of analysis of this justification are identified. Rules, principles and evaluations are used as justifying arguments and their characteristics determine the dimensions of rationality of decision depending on the features of rules, various conceptions of principles, and kinds of relativisation of evaluations. The dimensions of legal rationality depend mainly on three singled out conceptions of rationality, i.e., formal rationality dealing with the deep structure of justification, instrumentally oriented rationality as content of justifiability, and communicative rationality linked with the pragmatics of human interaction. Legitimacy, according to the presented analysis, appears as a subclass of external justification dealing with axiological premisses in terms of instrumental rationality and/or communicative rationality.     

European Corporate Laws, Regulatory Competition and Path Dependence

Beyond the well-known discussion in regard to the Cassis de Dijon of the European Court of Justice, implying the mutual recognition of national product regulations, the topic of mutual recognition and regulatory competition has emerged again in the realm of European corporate laws (“Centros” of the ECJ in 1999). Can effective competition among European corporate laws be expected? In the US a broad discussion has developed whether the existing competition process among US corporate laws leads to permanent legal improvements by legal innovations or to a race to the bottom. Beyond this discussion a new point has been raised recently: the possibility and importance of path dependence as a potential problem for the efficacy of competition among corporate laws (lock-ins). For the analysis of this problem we apply the concept of technological paradigms and trajectories to legal rules in corporate law and introduce “legal paradigms,” which direct the search for better legal solutions in certain directions and might be stabilized by certain factors (esp. complementarities to other legal rules) leading to considerable path dependence effects. Our results show that path dependence might play a crucial role for competition among European corporate laws, even if the principle of mutual recognition would be introduced to corporate laws in the EU, implying that competition among European corporate laws might be difficult and sluggish. Consequently the question arises whether additional meta-rules should be established that might mitigate the problem of path dependence and lock-ins in regulatory competition in corporate law.     

The Rule in Wilkinson v Downton: Conduct,Intention, and Justifiability

The decision in OPO v MLA [2014] EWCA Civ 1277 causes confusion to the rule in Wilkinson v Downton. A strong line of authorities indicates that the defendant must either have an actual intention to cause physical injury or be reckless as to the causing of such harm, the latter being determined by the likelihood of harm being caused by the defendant's act. ‘Imputed intention’ does not form a separate category of mental state. There was also a missed opportunity to develop a ‘justifiability’ criterion, by which policy considerations can be taken into account to preclude an application of the tort. This criterion ought to be developed in a principled manner, in line with the existing jurisprudence concerning human rights and with the policy limitations as developed in the context of other torts.     

Prevention and health standards: American, Soviet, and European models

This paper explores some significant sources of variation in the way health standards are derived and used in various countries: differences in biological and regulatory philosophies, in enforcement strategies, and in institutional arrangements. Such cross-national variations raise a number of questions about the process of standard-setting. Among the issues discussed here are the nature of the trade-off between long-run goals and feasibility criteria that merely codify current technical and economic practice, and the possibility of replacing statutory regulation by self-regulation and non-statutory codes and standards.     

Legal Meanings Across Linguistic Barriers: The Intralingual and Interlingual Translation of Laws in Greece and Cyprus

In my paper I will discuss both the processes of interlingual and intralingual translation of laws. The objective is to establish how the intralingual and the interlingual translation process influence or even shape a particular language of the law affecting thus the laws and the communication in a given legal system. In order to achieve this, I will initially research into the historical process that produced a series of intralingual translations of major laws in Greece and both interlingual and intralingual translations of laws in Cyprus, investigate the main principles used in interlingual and intralingual translation, examine how the languages of the law in Greece and Cyprus were affected by these translations, and show how intralingual and interlingual translation influenced the law both in Greece and Cyprus.     

美国法上“记者”的含义

在美国各州,记者享有在法庭上拒绝作证的权利,因此,哪些人是记者,即法律上确定"记者"的含义非常重要。美国存在联邦和州两个法律体系。在联邦法律体系中,至今不承认记者有拒证权。而在各州的法律体系中,36个州和哥伦比亚特区存在保护记者拒证权的"盾牌法"。根据立法和判例,美国法律认为所有以从事大众传播为目的的媒体记者都可以是记者,无论是出版社、报刊、广播、电视还是互联网站、博客或者其他电子媒体。个人要成为实质上的记者必须具备两个条件:一是实际参与了将要发表或者已经发表的报道的调查与采访;二是在开始收集新闻的过程中就有将报道向公众传播的明确意图。记者也不总是那些已经发表了作品的人,对于有证据证明,其调查、采访、写作的目的是为了完成作品向大众传播,那么无论他处于调查、采访、写作的哪个阶段,他都是"记者",可以享受记者拒证权。     

中世纪西欧法律的内在逻辑与现代法律的开启

从整体上讲,中世纪西欧的法律深受神学思想的影响,并在神权与王权长期的斗争过程形成了神权的独语特性;在世俗法领域强调初级互惠的观念;在具体的纠纷解决过程中强调激发个人以决斗为表现形式的内在勇气。尽管中世纪西欧法律的内在逻辑导致神性对人性的压制、法律人道主义的缺失以及法律独立性的缺乏,但是,这套逻辑及其所支撑的法律制度并不像有的学者所认为的那样一无是处。它对西方法律传统的现代转型以及法律主体性的开启具有重要的意义。     

现代生命医学与美国相关法律的发展

近30年来现代医学技术的高速发展及惊人进步挑战着世界各国的法律及道德观念.本世纪更因生命科学的巨大发展而被命名为生命科学世纪.现代生命科学在变革世界的同时也带来了史无前例的道德伦理问题,引发了激烈的争论.为了适应这些新的发展,美国的法律做出了相应的变革.这些新的法律法规影响着美国人民的工作生活及几乎所有的法律领域,例如医疗法、家庭法、遗产法、商业法、专利法、刑法等都极大程度地受到现代医学及相关法律的制约与影响.当代各个领域中的美国律师及政治领导人必须熟悉生命医学的有关法律,以为社会提供高质量和全方位的服务.生命医学法律更是当代世界及美国政坛的激战舞台,美国总统布什于2006年7月19日第一次使用了总统否决权,驳回了美国国会新通过的干细胞研究的法律,此举引发了激烈的政治波澜.着重介绍当代美国生命医学法律中的最热点论题,包括医疗决定权、安乐死、人类克隆及人胚胎干细胞研究等有关法律的发展过程及存在的问题与面临的挑战.