论医疗损害技术鉴定危机与改革

法律规定的不完善以及法官对鉴定结论的依赖性造成了目前医疗鉴定中,医疗事故技术鉴定与法医学医疗鉴定共存的二元化局面。侵权责任法在民事赔偿上否定了医疗事故的概念,提出以医疗损害责任为核心的民事责任制度,使医疗鉴定面临了新的问题。医疗事故技术鉴定机制和法医学医疗鉴定机制都存在种种缺陷,不能完全满足侵权责任法对医疗鉴定的新的需求。无论是鉴定结论的固有属性还是侵权责任法的新的技术内容都要求对现有的医疗事故技术鉴定模式进行改革,建立起符合《侵权责任法》要求的医疗损害技术鉴定制度。     

论医疗损害技术鉴定危机与改革

法律规定的不完善以及法官对鉴定结论的依赖性造成了目前医疗鉴定中,医疗事故技术鉴定与法医学医疗鉴定共存的二元化局面。侵权责任法在民事赔偿上否定了医疗事故的概念,提出以医疗损害责任为核心的民事责任制度,使医疗鉴定面临了新的问题。医疗事故技术鉴定机制和法医学医疗鉴定机制都存在种种缺陷,不能完全满足侵权责任法对医疗鉴定的新的需求。无论是鉴定结论的固有属性还是侵权责任法的新的技术内容都要求对现有的医疗事故技术鉴定模式进行改革,建立起符合《侵权责任法》要求的医疗损害技术鉴定制度。     

公务员可以对上级说“不”的法理分析——以“权利·义务·责任”为分析路径

我国《公务员法》第五十四条蕴含了公务员可以对上级说"不"这一命题,体现了法律规范条款中严密、完整的"权利·义务·责任"的结构形态,在一定程度上也体现了公务员的自主地位。但现实生活中公务员抵抗权的实现却存在疑问。抵抗权绝不能仅仅落脚于可否说"不"这一宏观理论上,还应更多地着眼于具体的前提条件、权利义务、配套细则、救济方法等方面,以便进一步增强可操作性。     

Automated consent through privacy agents: Legal requirements and technical architecture

The changes imposed by new information technologies, especially pervasive computing and the Internet, require a deep reflection on the fundamental values underlying privacy and the best way to achieve their protection. The explicit consent of the data subject, which is a cornerstone of most data protection regulations, is a typical example of requirement which is very difficult to put into practice in the new world of “pervasive computing” where many data communications necessarily occur without the users' notice. In this paper, we argue that an architecture based on “Privacy Agents” can make privacy rights protection more effective, provided however that this architecture meets a number of legal requirements to ensure the validity of consent delivered through such Privacy Agents. We first present a legal analysis of consent considering successively (1) its nature; (2) its essential features (qualities and defects) and (3) its formal requirements. Then we draw the lessons of this legal analysis for the design of a valid architecture based on Privacy Agents. To conclude, we suggest an implementation of this architecture proposed in a multidisciplinary project involving lawyers and computer scientists.     

校园人身伤害赔偿案件中保险公司的诉讼地位和赔偿责任

作为校方责任险一方的保险公司在校园人身伤害赔偿案件中的诉讼地位和赔偿责任与其在交通事故损害赔偿案件中的诉讼地位和赔偿责任有本质不同。     

Revisiting country of origin principle: Challenges related to regulating e-commerce in the European Union

The article analyses the country of origin principle of information society services in the light of harmonisation and unification efforts undertaken by the European lawgiver. Although the country of origin principle remains the key element of the construction of freedom to provide information society services, the principle itself suffers a number of both explicit and implicit restrictions which render its practical application a serious challenge. The difficulty is posed by the fact that the Electronic Commerce Directive fails to expressly specify both the scope of harmonisation as regards the principle, and the level of harmonisation of the directive itself. Furthermore, it is understood differently by private international lawyers. In the eDate Advertising case the ECJ ruled that the principle is not a conflict-of-laws rule, neither does it require implementation to the national legal systems in this shape. This is not to mean, however, that the debate over the function of the country of origin principle in private international law is over. Last but not least, there are many different types of country of origin principles applicable to various types of services provided via the Internet. This multitude of country of origin principles is perhaps the greatest weakness the regulatory approach adopted by the European lawmaker.     

Rethinking the notion of hosting in the aftermath of Delfi: Shifting from liability to responsibility?

Liability of Internet intermediaries for a third-party content is a complex topic, especially with regards to the storage of illegal or harmful postings offered by portals. The E-Commerce Directive offered a liberal framework for handling such cases, provided that a hosting service provider has not played an active role in content management. Being passive turned out to be the key precondition for immunity under safe harbour provisions. Yet, after the Delfi ruling the legal landscape has changed radically. Although the judgment of the Strasbourg tribunal has been dismissed in some jurisdictions as an error or one-off case, the truth is that it took into account acquis communautaire and imposed liability on the news portal, which followed the guidelines of Google France and eBay rulings. Given the lack of predictability of the current legal framework, the aim of this contribution is to offer a deep-dive into the notion of hosting from a technical perspective in order to better understand why Articles 14–15 of the E-Commerce Directive may require a re-examination. It is also submitted that portals and other online service providers relying on a broad construction of safe harbours should be entitled to Good Samaritan protection akin to section 230 of the American Communications Decency Act in order not to hold them liable for being active in fighting hate speech and other forms of illegal and harmful conduct.     

论证券民事责任制度的完善--评《最高人民法院关于审理证券市场因虚假陈述引发的民事赔偿案件的若干规定》

<最高人民法院关于审理证券市场因虚假陈述引发的民事赔偿案件的若干规定>中有些规定不合理.应将虚假陈述民事责任人范围扩及专业中介中服务机构的直接责任人、证券监管机构及其直接责任人.行政处罚决定和人民法院的刑事裁判不应作为人民法院受理有关民事赔偿案件的前置条件.利空的虚假陈述也会导致投资者的损失.在证券发行市场虚假陈述的赔偿范围应扩及相关费用.     

论《合同法》中的违约责任制度

违约责任是当事人不履行或不适当履行合同所产生的法律责任 ,具有相对性、约定性 ,是一种财产责任。违约行为的形态 ,从合同履行情况的角度分类 ,可分为不履行合同义务和不完全履行合同义务 ;从违约行为发生的时间上分类 ,可分为届期违约和预期违约。我国《合同法》对违约责任的归责原则采取无过错责任原则为主 ,过错责任原则和过错推定责任原则为辅的原则。     

保证方式、保证期间、诉讼时效与保证责任——对担保法施行前所发生保证行为的法律分析

保证责任与保证方式、保证期间和诉讼时效直接相关。保证方式不同,保证人承担保证责任的顺序和强度不同。保证期间届满,保证责任免除,保证债务诉讼时效问题也就不存在;保证期间终结,保证债务生效从而不再受保证期间约束,而受保证债务诉讼时效约束。主债务诉讼时效与保证债务诉讼时效之间的关系应当是:前者届满,后者也届满;前者中断,后者未必中断;后者中断,前者必定中断。保证债务诉讼时效届满,保证债务沦为自然之债,债权人丧失请求人民法院强制保证人承担保证责任的胜诉权。对担保法施行前所发生保证行为的保证责任认定,应当遵循上述法理、适用相关法律和司法解释之规定,而不能以有关通知为依据。