人身侵权责任相关问题研究

早期社会人身侵权的公法与私法救济的界限相对模糊,随着社会的发展,人身侵权责任在公法与私法的配置上发生分离,两者相互影响并指导司法实践.人身损害行为带来的损害赔偿责任分为人格利益补偿与财产性利益的补偿.人格利益包括生命利益与人身健康权利,财产性利益的补偿可以分为积极利益的补偿与预期利益的补偿.而根据我国当前国情,在司法实...     

Der Europ?ische Gerichtshof als Motor der Integration: Eine akteursbezogene Erkl?rung

For nearly five decades, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has developed a decisively pro-European case law and has become the ??engine of integration??. Institutional explanations shed light on the Court??s room for manoevre. They have to be complemented by actor-centered explanations that shed light on the judges?? motives of action. The explanation offered by the following paper is unfolded in two steps. In the first one, the article describes idiosyncrasies of the European law discourse that already shaped the judges before they were appointed. The analysis of the idiosyncrasies corresponds to a scepticism towards the idea of national sovereignty, a belief in the necessity of creative and idealist, law-augmenting judges and a dominance of output-oriented legitimization strategies. In a second step, the article shows that in the sociological sense the ECJ judges constitute a group. While the individual judges share an understanding of the aims and functions of European law, the group develops its own identity and grants status to those who perform successful actions with respect to the common integration agenda. This explanation is more realistic than ??rational choice?? explanations which point to the direct and personal benefits that judges derive from their pro-European case law.     

强制调解模式研究

通过搭建“强制调解的主导者”和“强制调解的适用阶段”两个维度所形成的框架，可以对强制调解进行类型化分析并提炼出四种模式。一国或地区选择何种强制调解模式，要受到程序正义理念、传统法律程序等因素的综合影响。基于我国实际，未来有必要引入司法性诉前强制调解模式，实现从程序保障提高、调解人适格和制裁措施到位三方面确保诉前强制调解优势的发挥，同时有必要对我国原有的司法性诉中强制调解模式进行改造，实现调解者与审判者身份的分离和调解程序与审判程序时空的分离，并在立法中明确赋予法官动态裁量调解启动的权力以及启动调解时应当考虑的基准。     

国外青少年价值观教育及其启示

每个人的价值观是否符合社会主流价值观,对于个人自身发展以及社会稳定都很重要,而培养青少年正确的价值观更是关乎国家未来稳健发展的大事。国外的青少年价值观教育研究早于我国并且比较完善,通过对其进行梳理,可以为我国青少年价值观教育提供一些启示。     

试论陕甘宁边区“改造说书”运动

“改造说书”运动是继“新秧歌”运动之后文艺工作者面向大众、面向工农兵普及的又一实践。文艺工作者和民间艺人一起，改造了旧的传统的陕北说书，使之成为反映阶级斗争、生产斗争、军事斗争等新内容的“新说书”，并在边区蓬勃发展起来。“新说书”作为一种有效的宣传手段，发挥了开启民智，教化民众；宣讲时事，评议新闻事件；传递战争信息，稳定民心；引导舆论，唤起大众的斗争意识等社会功能。产生了很大的社会影响。     

What does “knock and announce” mean? An analysis of<Emphasis Type="Italic">Wilson v. Arkansas</Emphasis> and its progeny

The U.S. Supreme Court held in Wilson v. Arkansas (1994) that the common law “knock-and-announce” principle formed part of the “reasonableness” inquiry under the Fourth Amendment. However, the Court’s opinion gave little guidance as to what would be unreasonable under these circumstances. Some critics expressed concern that this lack of guidance would lead to many variations among lower courts. Other observers discerned a signal that little should be deemed “unreasonable” in the context of “knock and announce.” These criticisms are analyzed through a review of lower court interpretations of Wilson.     

Perceived fairness of drug-testing policies: An application of Leventhal’s principles of procedural justice

Employees rate the fairness of organizational policies by applying principles of distributive and procedural justice. Using Leventhal’s (1980) Principles of Procedural Justice, the current study surveyed 279 upper-level college and graduate students to determine the impact each principle has on support for drugtesting policies. The results support the hypothesis that drug-testing programs that violate these principles are viewed as unfair.     

Author Index volume 35 (2002)

Authors Index

Author Index volume 35 (2002)