一座新的宫殿——《欧陆法律史概览:事件、渊源、人物及运动》译余剩语

《欧陆法律史概览:事件、渊源、人物及运动》是美国法学院协会"大陆法史系列丛书"中的第一卷。此书除第一编、第九编外,其他七编均以国别为经,又以各国法律发展中的主要时期为纬,描述各国法律发展中的几大要素,即事件、渊源、人物及运动。在很大程度上,它不仅是一部介绍欧陆各国(不包括斯拉夫法系、拜占庭法系及匈牙利法系)法制史概况的书籍,还是一部法学史作品。意大利法、瑞士法、斯堪的那维亚法及西班牙法等内容研究角度别致,内容新颖。本书的用功最勤之处,不在于它的理论建构,而在于其正本清源,旨在说明什么是真的法律史。法学译著应该注意主要遵循"名从主人"、"约定俗成"、"服从主科"和"尊重规范"等翻译原则。     

美国产品责任中的纯粹经济损失规则探析——兼论我国相关法律制度的构建

在美国的侵权法上,因产品自身存在的缺陷而发生的产品本身价值的减损、修理更换发生的费用,以及因产品不能使用而发生的利润损失等被视为是一种纯粹经济损失。针对该类损失,美国的法院创造了责任排除规则,并且各州在对这一规则在运用时采用的是一种灵活且有弹性的实践方式。这样灵活的纯粹经济损失规则对于我国相关法律制度的构建非常有借鉴意义。     

过错及因果关系推定与证明责任倒置——从事实到价值的思考

过错及因果关系推定是法律在前提事实(某种情境下的损害)获得证明的条件下,绕过了法官对基础事实问题的认定,而对法律事实中的法律问题(过错及因果关系有无)给出的暂时性结论。证明责任本质上是要件事实真伪不明时当事人承担的败诉风险,是对法律事实中事实问题的解决。因此在大陆法系,法定推定必然导致证明责任倒置。英美法系情形不同。过错及因果关系推定具有相同的正当性基础,它们在现行法中的体现尚未得到全面认识。     

关于大陆法系研究的几个问题

自从日本学者穗积陈重提出＂法族＂以及瑞士学者霍尔、美国学者威格摩尔提出＂法系＂的概念以来,对世界上各个法系的研究就逐步展开,尤其是英美法系和伊斯兰法系的研究,更是一直受到学术界的关注,也推出了一批成果。与此相比,对大陆法系的研究,可能因语言等的问题,成果相对比较少,对一些最基础的问题,研究也显得比较单薄。随着我国精通欧洲语言的法学人才的数量不断增加,对大陆法系的研究,也将成为我国法学研究中的一个重要领域。     

Advocating Democracy: The Role of Lawyers in Taiwan's Political Transformation

Litigation hm not been a significant strategy in Taiwan for chauenging injustice due to the use of the Civil Law tradition as a model for the Republic of China legal system and the diminished autonomy of the ROC legal profession and legal system under martial law and authoritarian rule. Individual lawyers, however, were amang the leading proponents of reform during Taiwan's recent transition to democratic rule. Furthermore, one of the significant liberaliring refonnr ushered in by the democratic transition has been the reform of the ROC legal profession. We examine the contribution of some lawyers to democratization and consider what role the reconstituted ROC legal profession may play in the political economy of Taiwan in the future.     

Alive and well: the good faith principle in Turkish contract law

Good faith is a principle prominent in civil law countries but less so in common law countries, and which allows courts to deviate from black letter law. It provides them with flexibility to change the outcome of a deductive legal decision if they regard it as absurd. The principle of good faith thus empowers the judiciary to deviate. It can be used for an indefinite number of cases and might lead to almost all conceivable legal consequences. For instance, the judge can invalidate the contract, change the price, suspend or change a clause in the contract, or grant injunctive relief, compensation of damages, the disgorgement of profits or a removal claim. We argue that if the principle of good faith is used to develop contract law into an instrument for redistributing wealth in favor of poor parties, this can destroy the concept of contract as a social mechanism for generating mutual gains for parties, which might lead to unwanted economic consequences in terms of efficiency losses. We argue that the principle of good faith must be carefully and reluctantly used to reconstruct the fully specified contract and that well-informed judges, who understand the factual environment of a contract well should ask how fair bur self-interested parties would have allocated the risk in a pre-contractual situation. If the courts restrict the application of the good faith principle to these functions, this provides elasticity that otherwise would not exist if courts would strictly use the rules laid down in black letter law. Moreover, it saves transactions costs and is therefore in line with economic reasoning. We look at the most important Turkish cases and find that the Turkish Supreme Court following Continental European doctrines of good faith actually uses this principle to curb opportunistic behavior of parties and not to achieve redistribution from the rich to the poor by way of interfering into contract law.     

BEFORE DEATH, WE MUST PART:

Domestic violence trends and case law reporters across the country suggest the time is right for a new alternative in the struggle to provide refuge for victims of domestic violence. As the American justice system stands right now, there is no significant mechanism in the United States with the financial, legislative, and legal backing to help victims of domestic violence escape. A model for relocation based upon the Federal Witness Protection Program can provide such a mechanism. The first part of this note presents a New Jersey case where a divorce proceeding resulted in the relocation and change of identity of a battered woman and her children, and suggests this remedy as a model for an interstate or federal relocation program for domestic violence victims. The next part provides a discussion of the merits and rationale behind such a program. The third part discusses the types of batterers this program would seem to protect against, a legal standard to ascertain whether someone is eligible, and certain logistical issues of a theoretical program. The next two parts discuss items troublesome to the implementation of both state and federal programs. The sixth part discusses potential issues such programs might face once implemented on both levels. Finally, the last part provides an overall assessment of the feasibility of such programs, followed by the conclusion. While the costs that would be incurred by such a program on the interstate or federal level may be quite high, it is quite clear that relocation and protection could save countless lives each year and provide a new beginning for the innocent victims that toil in a world of domestic violence.     

案卷排他与看得见的程序作用

案卷排他原则,是指行政主体作出行政行为只能以案卷为根据,不能在案卷以外,以当事人所未知悉和未论证的事实为根据。不能把案卷排他原则等同于听证笔录排他原则。案卷排他由最初的单方证据加偏见的排他发展到单方证据排他;由正式程序裁决发展到非正式程序裁决;由英美法系发展到大陆法系。其普适性在于它使程序的作用得以显现,从而保障程序中认定的事实因素与法律因素为作出行政行为的惟一依据,从而使程序的功能和价值得以实现。     

Group Size, Group Heterogeneity, and Voting Rules: An Application of the Buchanan-Tullock Model to the European Union

In The Calculus of Consent, Buchanan and Tullock develop a theory of voting rules in which the optimal rule is determined by minimizing the sum of voters' external and decision costs. Other researchers have extended the Buchanan-Tullock model to include the effects of group size and heterogeneity on external and decision costs and, subsequently, on the optimal voting rule. Despite the prominence of the Buchanan-Tullock model in the constitutional, legal, and public-choice literature, their theory has not (to our knowledge) been tested. In this paper we test the Buchanan-Tullock model by examining the establishment and evolution of voting rules in the European Union. Over the past four decades, the European Union has experienced significant changes in number and heterogeneity, and we interpret the general movement towards, and call for, less inclusive voting rules as support for Buchanan and Tullock's original theory.     

案例指导制度下的法律推理及其规则

与制定法传统下的法律推理不同,案例指导制度下的法律推理由法律规则、指导性案例、案件事实以及判决结论四个要素构成。在这种思维模式中,由于对待决案件与指导性案例作出是否同案的判断以及如何形成同判是整个法律推理的论证重点,判定两者是否属于相同案件以及如何作出相同判决的方法自然成为这种法律推理的核心方法。案例指导制度下法律推理的规则主要包括：基本参照规则、实现同案同判的认识规则、断定同案的判断规则、形成同判的约束规则、回归规则以及指导性案例选编的编写规则。上述推理形式和推理规则的系统作用是案例指导制度下法律推理得以正确进行的基础和保障。     

Using British Trial Procedures in American Cases: A More Civil Trial?

A number of attorneys, judges, and legal scholars have asserted that the overly combative nature of American trials may impact on the actual quality of justice and bring the legal system into disrepute. In contrast, many who witness criminal and civil trials conducted in Great Britain are struck by the greater apparent civility of the courtroom atmosphere. Closer examination of the English system reveals seven specific procedural differences that may contribute to this perceived change in atmosphere. In this study, these procedural differences were manipulated and their effect on verdict and on perceptions of trial participants measured. In addition, opinions about these differences were elicited. Results showed that while the trial was perceived as more civil, and the judge viewed more positively, participants tended to indicate preferences for the American style. Implications of these results are discussed.     

A Proposal for a New Rule of Adverse Possession

In this paper, I propose a new rule of adverse possession whereby the occupier acquires title if the owner does not raise an objection to the occupation within the legal limitation and at the same time the owner himself has not met the legal standard of monitoring effort. I show that the proposed rule with suitably chosen legal standard of monitoring effort can improve efficiency relative to the current rule of adverse possession.     

Optimal antitrust enforcement: information cost and deterrent effect

This study analyzes the optimal antitrust enforcement rule and, in doing so, presents a model that illuminates two important issues. First, it compares the per se legal and illegal judicial standards to the rule of reason judicial standard in terms of information costs and general social welfare. Second, it seeks to derive the optimal judicial standard that minimizes the problems of under- and over-deterrence. These two issues are closely related because the benefit of additional information can only be measured by its deterrent effects. In this respect, this work synthesizes economic models from decision theory and the public enforcement of law. Lastly, in addition to discussing the optimal information level, we derive the optimal permissiveness of the judicial standard, the optimal burden of proof, and the optimal punishment level. We also analyze how these policy variables are interrelated.     

Transplanting Jury Trials in South Korean Legal Soils: Comparative Analysis with Jury Trials in the United States

Jury trials, known as common-law institution centering on the UK and the USA, for the first time in Korean adjudicatory history, have been transplanted into Korean legal soils under cultural and political climate with legal roots of the “Civil Participation in Criminal Trial Act (CPCTA) of 2007” since 2008. This research examines legal and operational issues of jury trials through comparative analysis between the United States and South Korea. Several legal characteristics of 2013 revision bill of CPCTA, proposed by the Committee of Civil Participation in the Judiciary (CCPJ), are to be pointed out: so-called “civil participation” approach, de facto binding power of jury verdict and sentencing, and a stricter standard for a jury verdict or decision (3/4 majority). Statistical results from planting jury trials in both American and Korean legal system proved to be very similar. Meanwhile, a 2013 revision bill has to overcome several practical and legal obstacles, such as low usage of jury trials, the high rate of judicial dismissal of defendants’ petitions, and violation of Article 27 of the Korean Constitution. Under the current legislative scheme, judges in Korean courts need to operate jury trials in such a careful and respectful way that the revision may neglect neither a defendant’s right to jury trial nor jury’s verdict. Legal scholars, experts, and legislators with interests in implementing jury trials in Korea should research on ways to expand the system to other judicial procedures such as juvenile, civil, family, and administrative cases.     

正确的与合理的

英美刑法对含糊的、但具解释力的“合理性”的依赖促成了平面式法律推理,而大陆刑法则基于对“正确的”这一概念的独特理解而形成了构建式的法律思维模式。虽然无论是“合理的”还是“正确的”都体现了一种使刑法规范超越实定法的努力,但“正确的”代表着一种一元性的法律秩序,意味每一法律争议只存在唯一正确答案,而“合理的”则驱使法律秩序走向多元。在某种程度上,这也正是哈特和德沃金关于自由裁量权问题的争论的症结所在。     

On the optimality of a duty-to-rescue rule and the cost of wrongful intervention

In common law legal systems, there is no legal duty to rescue persons in danger. By contrast in code-based legal systems, the principle of duty to rescue does apply. What is behind this difference? To answer this question, we develop a new model extending the reach and strength of the standard civic duty game by taking into account the cost of wrongful intervention. We use this model to analyze and compare three policy options: doing nothing, adopting a duty-to-rescue rule, and encouraging would-be rescuers. We show that a duty-to-rescue rule is more likely to be welfare enhancing when the cost of inappropriately intervening is low, and that, in certain cases, encouraging would-be rescuers is preferred by a representative citizen to both a duty-to-rescue rule and no-rule. Finally, we offer an explanation for the choices made in the USA and France as to whether to use rescue laws.     

J.M.还是J.D.?——中、日、美复合型法律人才培养制度比较

传统上,中、日两国法学教育属于综合法律素质养成型教育类型,并不与法律职业直接相联系。但自上个世纪九十年代以来,两国出现了借鉴美国法学院制度,探索建立法律实务教育模式的新动向。论文对法律硕士专业学位(J.M.)教育、日本的法科大学院(J.D.)、以及美国的法学院制度(J.D.)进行了比较观察。对中日两国新型法学教育制度形成与效果的关系作了分析,对法学院制度形成的路径、方式和评价机制问题作了探讨。作者认为,制度形成的关键不在于形而上的可行性讨论,根本性问题是对制度要素的观察、分析以及摄入,构成要素的摄取决定了制度的效果和命运。     

Legal Entrepreneurship and the Strategic Virtues of Legal Uncertainty

The field of law and strategy (LAS) has advanced our understanding of the law's role in competitive advantage. To date, however, LAS has neglected low rule of law environments—countries characterized by expansive degrees of legal uncertainty. LAS should account for these settings, too, since environmental uncertainty is a strategically significant factor for any company. This article situates the strategic relevance of legal uncertainty in the Chinese context and fills an important gap by illustrating how LAS principles apply in low rule of law jurisdictions. Specifically, this article develops the construct of legal entrepreneurship—the notion that attorneys may apply an entrepreneurial mind-set and skill set to position the client favorably and legitimately within the uncertainties of the legal landscape, thereby creating legal competitive advantages for the client. Drawing upon interviews with expert attorneys and executives, this article presents a typology of legal strategies available to U.S. companies in China, uniquely modeling these approaches along the two fundamental dimensions of legal strategy. Additionally, this article identifies two basic types of legal uncertainty in the cross-border context and offers guidelines for the exercise of legal entrepreneurship. Together, these arguments demonstrate that legal entrepreneurship is an empirically viable construct within the LAS project. In low rule of law jurisdictions that have embraced foreign enterprise, legal entrepreneurship will generally optimize the American company's pursuit of both legal value creation and legal risk management.     

论法律原则的司法适用——从规范性法学方法论角度的一个分析

法律原则之把握,与其给以界说,毋宁探究其适用;而在司法实践中,法律原则的适用大凡有四种情形第一,原则与规则一致情形下,原则作为规则的基础和指引。第二,规则缺位的情形下,适用原则以作漏洞补充。第三,原则与规则相冲突的情形下,适用原则创制规则的例外。第四,原则之间相互冲突情形下的特别复杂的适用。四种情形也可能在结构上交叉耦合,其中第一种情形已为人熟知,而其他情形,尤其是三、四两种则有待深究。本文即力图从规范性法学方法论的纵深角度,探讨法律原则之司法适用的逻辑结构。     

Professionalization as Status Adaptation: The Nobility, the Bureaucracy, and the Modernization of the Legal Profession in Finland

In contrast to Anglo-American lines of professional development, the central agent of professionalization in many Continental countries was the state bureaucracy. However, this article proposes that an understanding of the class structure of traditional society is also needed to explain the privileged position of lawyers. An historical study of lawyers in the 19th century, after Finland was annexed by Russia, demonstrates that the legal profession provided the nobility an important medium of adaptation to the new society. The importance of the legal profession initially to the state bureaucracy, and subsequently to the nobility, explains its social prominence and its future development. An analysis of the position and needs of the prominent classes in the society of Old Regimes may constitute a fruitful viewpoint in the study of early professionalization in the Continental context more generally.