Introduction to the Special Issue on Peircean Semeiotic

This special issue should go a long way towards increasing the understanding of Peirce’s semeiotic and its applicability for solving problems in legal studies. In fact, the New Science of Semiotics should result in developing a rigorous and systematic methodology for legal studies making it a true semiotic science which I suggest calling “jurisology.”     

对法国物权变动债权意思主义的再思考

一般认为,《法国民法典》确立了物权变动的债权意思主义,即当事人间的债权意思引致了物权的变动。但深入研究《法国民法典》后却得出了并非完全一致的结论:所谓的物权变动的债权意思主义,是一定逻辑体系之前见下的结论。以权利生效的要件以及权利变动的过程和结果观之,债权意思产生物权变动的效果是荒诞的。物权意思+公示对抗应当被确立为物权变动的第四种立法模式。这一认识对于理解我国《物权法》关于物权变动的立法主义选择以及我国未来《民法典》的制定具有意义。     

公司章程“排除”公司法:立法表达与司法检视

我国现行《公司法》中的公司章程另有规定,从其规定条款,消解了实践中公司章程排除公司法相应条款的合法性危机。然而遗憾的是,对于公司法中的另有规定条款之立法筹划与司法裁判问题学界少有系统性研究。从实现章程自治的制度初衷而言,未来公司法规则之修订应充分利用假设交易方法、遵守反之则解释方法与单向缺省方法重新塑构其中的缺省性规范,以进一步明确并扩展公司章程可排除的规则范围;同时,相关案件之司法裁判应抛弃公司合同主义的裁判路径和初始章程与后续章程二元界分的裁判标准,转而采用目的性标准与公正度标准,以团体法标准从实质意义上判别公司章程排除公司法决议的效力属性。     

论共有表演者权

两个以上的民事权利主体就同一表演活动共同享有的表演者权称为共有表演者权。共有表演者权既可以通过共同的表演活动原始产生,也可以通过转让和继承的方式继受取得。共有表演者权的权利主体包括自然人和法人组织,权利对象为静态的表演形象和动态的表演活动,权利内容则具有人身权和财产权的二元属性。共有表演者权的权利归属以及许可、转让等行使规则比较复杂,但我国现行《著作权法》几乎没有规定,应完善相关立法,以约定优先、鼓励传播的原则确立其行使规则。     

关于完善我国医疗事故责任等级的建议简

我国现行的《医疗事故技术鉴定暂行办法》规定了医疗事故中医疗过失行为的责任程度分为：完全责任、主要责任、次要责任、轻微责任。该办法用这四种责任程度来判定医疗过失行为的责任程度存在明显的缺陷,缺少了一个同等责任程度的规定。为了今后便于司法实践的操作,公平合理地维护医患双方的权益,应该增加同等责任程度的规定,来完善我国医疗事故技术鉴定相关立法。     

论被害人过错影响定罪量刑的根据

被害人过错影响定罪量刑的根据,西方有责任分担说和谴责性降低说两种学说。责任分担说从分析造成客观危害的原因入手,引出了被害人过错应当分担部分责任的结论;谴责性降低说着眼于加害人的主观面,提出了被害人过错会导致加害人应受谴责性降低的观点。两种学说均只揭示了事物的一个方面,并存在缺陷。主客观相统一是现代刑法的主轴,只有既重视主观又强调客观才能完整地说明被害人过错影响定罪量刑的根据。     

侵权法一般条款的保护范围

侵权法一般条款的立法模式及其保护范围是侵权立法中的重要问题。从比较法上看,德国法之规定与法国法之规定各有其优劣,但德国法更具借鉴意义。我国侵权立法,应认真总结以往立法及司法的成功经验,坚持已有的成熟做法,确立符合我国国情的立法模式。我国侵权责任法应通过一般条款列举具体的权利及利益保护范围,同时规定兜底条款,而不应从规定损害概念的角度界定侵权法的保护范围。     

中国服务外包产业发展的现状、问题及对策探讨——基于相关文献的综述分析

近年来,中国服务外包产业持续快速发展的良好势头非常抢眼,从而极大地弥补了该产业在中国起步时间较晚的相对不足.目前,服务外包产业不仅成为中国各类企业更多地参与和更好地角逐全球市场的新舞台与新高地,更成为进一步促动和实现中国经济发展方式新的转变以及产业结构升级转型的一条重要途径.由此,对中国服务外包产业发展进行现状评估、问题分析和对策探讨就成为国内学术界和实务界关注的重点.     

Violence against Women in Scandinavia: a Description and Evaluation of two new Laws Aiming to Protect Women

Violence against women by a present or former male partner has over the last decade been given a higher priority in the political discussion in all of the Scandinavian countries. Increasingly, violence in intimate relationships is viewed as a public rather than a private matter in these countries. With this change in attitudes and levels of political interest, higher expectations are placed on official authorities, including the criminal justice system, to deal actively with this social problem. In all of the Scandinavian countries it may, for example, be decided by a prosecutor that a woman should be protected from a man by issuing a restraining order. Moreover, a new offence called ‘gross violation of a woman's integrity’ was introduced into the Swedish penal code in 1998. With this offence, less serious but repeated violent acts committed by a man against a present or former female partner are to be judged as one serious offence. The stipulated sanction for this offence is imprisonment between 6 months and 6 years. The purpose of this article is to evaluate how the police, the prosecutors and the courts deal with this new offence. The article also present results from an evaluation of restraining orders in Sweden.     

Juvenile Justice in Scandinavia

The main issue is the legal protection of children and juveniles suspected of or convicted for crime. The age of criminal responsibility is 15 years in the countries concerned. Particular juvenile justice systems do not exist in Scandinavia. There are, however, exceptions from the general system in order to maintain needs, interests and rights of children and juveniles. Some common characteristics are described, for instance diversion of juveniles from prison into social welfare measures and the prohibition of placing children in jail. Individual characteristics are pointed out as well. Introduction of secure social institutions as an alternative to imprisonment in Sweden and Denmark is one, mediation processes with children as parties in Finland and Norway is another. It is argued that from the point of view of legality the demands for legal rights are of greatest importance in prosecution and punishment matters, whereas social welfare support is not to the same degree concerned about such questions. Furthermore it is argued that in spite of good intentions the Scandinavian countries challenge the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, by not definitely prohibiting the possibility of a juvenile serving a prison sentence together with adults. It is stated that the distance between constructive pragmatism and destructive loss of principles as legality, equality and proportionality may be short. Crime trends are not linked to the politics: there is no relation between crime rates and political attention to crime. Juvenile justice has increasing political attention these years while the crime rates tend to be stable. In relation not solely to the economy and the Convention but first and foremost in the interest of children and juveniles more thought should be given to scientific experiences about early and appropriate prevention.