推导作为诉讼证明的逻辑

关于证据与证明的传统哲学与逻辑理论存在着实践缺陷,形式逻辑中的演绎和归纳推理不能合理解释依证据进行的事实认定。证据的作用不可能是回复案件真相,而只是为特定假设提供支持。推导作为一种可废止和情境化的第三种类型的推理是契合诉讼事实认定的逻辑形式,这种内容求真的推理与形式逻辑上的演绎及归纳推理有着本质的区别。推导理论的提出会对传统证据法理论形成冲击,从这一角度我们会对证明标准与证明责任、直接证据与间接证据、表见证明与摸索证明、事实推定与经验法则等概念与问题形成新的认识。理解案件事实认定过程的推导本质,并对其缺陷有足够的认识,才能在实践中谨慎论证与比较各种假设,以全面的信息检验假设以避免最终的误认。     

军舰护航打击索马里海盗：法律依据和司法程序安排

军舰护航涉及国内法和国际法双重依据问题,其中联合国安理会的相关决议和索马里政府的同意,构成军舰护航打击索马里海盗的国际法依据。随着打击海盗行动的深入发展,法律合作成为打击海盗国际合作中亟待加强的重要领域。各国应尽快订立或完善刑事罪名,确立对海盗的普遍管辖权;协议海盗疑犯的移交、审判和监管安排,为军舰护航打击海盗提供法律基础;加强对索马里海域沿岸国的援助,帮助其加强国内司法能力建设。     

香港冲突法中的国际间儿童诱拐问题

1980年《国际诱拐儿童民事方面公约》为国际间儿童诱拐问题的解决提供了一个国际方法,该公约在1997年7月1日之后继续适用于香港,并经转化为香港法例第512章《掳拐和管养儿童条例》。对于海牙《国际诱拐儿童民事方面的公约》适用的案件,适用《掳拐和管养儿童条例》;而对于非公约调整的案件,则适用普通法规则。为了海牙《国际诱拐儿童民事方面公约》在香港得以更好地施行,香港法律改革委员会于2002年4月29日作出了《国际性的父母诱拐子女问题报告书》。2009年10月,政府当局对《国际性的父母诱拐子女问题报告书》作出回应。     

The Cybercrime Convention Committee's 2017 Guidance Note on Production Orders: Unilateralist transborder access to electronic evidence promoted via soft law

This article provides a critical analysis of the Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention Committee's Guidance Note of Production Orders, published on 1 March 2017. The article looks at the legal controversies surrounding production orders with a cross-border element. It explains the Guidance Note's background and origins, the basic provisions in the Cybercrime Convention allowing the law enforcement authorities to order and obtain certain information and discusses the requirements that follow from the relevant provisions of the Convention. This analysis is complemented by four critical remarks on the way the Guidance Note pushes the boundaries of acceptable treaty interpretation on the necessity of the Guidance Note, its position in regard to extraterritorial enforcement jurisdiction and sovereignty, its reticence towards fundamental rights and its refusal to define or clarify the important notion of “subscriber information”. The article argues that unilateralism is not a solution. Instead of soft law plumbing, what is needed is an agreement between sovereign states checked by their constituencies.     

RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS BETWEEN CHINA,JAPAN AND SOUTH KOREA IN THE NEW ERA: SOUTH KOREAN LAW PERSPECTIVE

This article discusses the rules for recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in the Republic of Korea (hereinafter referred to as “South Korea” or “Korea”). Articles 217 and 217-2 of the Civil Procedure Act of Korea and Articles 26 and 27 of the Civil Enforcement Act of Korea provide for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments respectively. Korea has not entered into any bilateral or multilateral treaties regarding the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and is not a party to the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements. The article also considers the current undesirable status of recognition and enforcement of judgments in the region consisting of China, Japan and South Korea (hereinafter referred to as “Region”) and suggests a course of action to be taken to improve the situation. The author believes that the experts of the Region should embark upon a project to improve the current situation and that the first step should be to exchange and gather information on the current legal regime of the countries in the Region on the recognition and enforcement of judgments. The author looks forward to future cooperation among the experts in the Region on this topic and is confident that the reciprocity requirement, which currently is a major obstacle to the mutual recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in the Region, will be overcome in the near future.     

Impacts of the internet on traditional jurisdictional principles in international civil and commercial cases

Started as an undefined US military project to the current global network, the Internet has been developing and improved at an amazing speed, which also brought out enormous challenges to the traditional way of life worldwide. By analyzing the features of the Internet, this paper reveals the impacts of the Internet on jurisdictional principles applied in traditional international civil and commercial cases and aims to apply traditional rules under the new environment of the Internet. In addition, by referring to the international uniform legislation and from the US judicial theories and practices, this paper also brings out reflections and suggestions regarding this issue.     

国际投资仲裁中最惠国条款的适用和管辖权的新发展

国际投资仲裁中某一投资条约规定的最惠国条款能否延伸适用于其他投资条约规定的仲裁程序是近年来的一个热门话题,仲裁裁决的实践给出了两种完全不同的答案,并且依据《维也纳条约法公约》对有关条款进行解释几乎是所有仲裁庭必做的工作.但是近两年的裁决似乎有一种将最惠国条款扩大适用于仲裁程序的趋势,尽管不同仲裁庭甚至同一仲裁庭的不同仲裁员对于同一问题可能会有不同的观点.我国签订的投资条约应当明确最惠国条款和仲裁程序的适用范围,以及规定条约不溯及既往原则等.     

Current legal approaches to international Terrorism

Abstract

Most difficulties in achieving international cooperation to suppress “terrorism” reflect failures to take account of the way authority is distributed in the international legal order. Attempts to narrow or abolish the “political offense,” exception to extradition treaties, are seen as either futile or self‐defeating for both political and legal reasons. Five other approaches are analyzed and promise is seen in three of them. The fourth, resting on the extension of national jurisdiction in disregard of the limits inherent in the international legal order, is seen as the one most attractive to the United States, Germany, and Iran, but the one most likely to lead to unmanageable political complications. The fifth, relating to an “international criminal court,” is seen as most attractive to lawyers who would like to rule the world, but is inconsistent with both law and reality. A plea is made to statesmen and lawyers to examine the other three more closely.     

合同债权转让情形诉讼管辖权归属研究--以受让人与原合同债务人纠纷为视角

目前国内关于合同债权转让情形受让人与原合同债务人间纠纷的诉讼管辖确定规则的理解存在误判。受让人与原合同债务人之间并非合同关系。受让人所取得权利性质上为以合同债权为客体的支配权。受让人与原合同债务人之间的关系为受让人行使该支配权过程中所形成的关系。因此其管辖权的确定不应适用民事诉讼法第23条的规定,而应直接适用法释[2001]12号第2条及第3条所确立的规则。该规则本质上为一个新的、有别于合同纠纷地域管辖规则的特殊地域管辖规则。