中国近代民事诉讼法探源

从知识传统的角度来看 ,我国民事诉讼法基本的概念、术语、原则、制度与理论框架主要渊源于西方的法典类型。它在我国新型法律体系以及在大学学科课程中的地位 ,是在本世纪最初十余年间以挽回法权为主旨的立宪修律活动的直接推动下 ,通过日本法律顾问的讲授和留日法科学生的译释等途径 ,迅速确立起来的 ,并由此为中国民事诉讼法近代传统的形成奠定了基础。     

表见代表及其适用--兼评<合同法>第50条

表见代表是指法人代表的行为虽然超越了法人的代表权限,但善意相对人基于一定外观相信其有代表法人之权而与之从事交易行为,该代表行为有效的制度.我国立法对这一制度的规定仅仅是开始,仍有许多配套规定亟待完善.     

再识“责任”与经济法

经济法责任制度是经济法理论研究的重要问题之一,也是法学界论证经济法是否为独立法律部门的重要依据.法律责任的历史发展经历了与其他社会责任分离、责任逻辑的完善、责任方式的基本定型等过程,这使得部分学者按传统法律部门作为划分标准,否认经济法责任的存在,进而否认经济法为独立法律部门.按社会活动领域和法律调整宗旨的标准划分法律部门,责任方式并非划分法律部门的绝对标准.经济法具有独特调整方法,其责任制度的精髓集中于"责权利效相统一"的原则.经济法责任不仅在不同程度上综合运用民事、行政、刑事责任方式而形成独特的责任制度,而且将责任制度前置于主体制度,增强经济责任制,形成其鲜明的调整特色.     

论携带凶器抢夺的定性

《刑法》第267条第二款关于"携带凶器抢夺的"按照抢劫罪定罪处罚的规定,有悖于主客观相统一的犯罪构成原则,不具备转化型抢劫罪的构成要件,与刑法第269条规定存在冲突,应予取消。     

Lineup Identification by Children: Effects of Clothing Bias

This study examined effects of clothing cues on children's identification accuracy from lineups. Four- to 14-year-olds (n = 228) saw 12 video clips of individuals, each wearing a distinctly colored shirt. After watching each clip children were presented with a target-present or target-absent photo lineup. Three clothing conditions were included. In 2 conditions all lineup members wore the same colored shirt; in the third, biased condition, the shirt color of only one individual matched that seen in the preceding clip (the target in target-present trials and the replacement in target-absent trials). Correct identifications of the target in target-present trials were most frequent in the biased condition, whereas in target-absent trials the biased condition led to more false identifications of the target replacement. Older children were more accurate than younger children, both in choosing the target from target-present lineups and rejecting target-absent lineups. These findings suggest that a simple clothing cue such as shirt color can have a significant impact on children's lineup identification accuracy.     

Impact of Defense-Only and Opposing Eyewitness Experts on Juror Judgments

Previous research shows that expert testimony on eyewitness memory influences mock-juror judgments. We examined the extent to which opposing expert testimony mitigates the impact of defense-only expert testimony. Participants (N = 497) viewed a video-taped trial involving an eyewitness identification and individually rendered verdicts and evaluated the evidence and the experts. We manipulated the Foils (unbiased vs. biased) and Instructions (unbiased vs. biased) of the lineup and Expert Testimony (no expert vs. defense-only expert vs. opposing experts). Expert testimony did not significantly influence juror judgments, but the opposing expert testimony diminished the credibility of the defense expert in the eyes of the jurors. Results point to the need for further research on conditions that qualify the impact of expert testimony.     

Eyewitness Testimony in Occupational Accident Investigations: Towards a Research Agenda

Accident investigation is frequently cited as the cornerstone of an effective occupational health and safety program. We suggest that the literature on accident investigation is based on a model of witnesses as neutral and accurate recording devices. The literature on eyewitness testimony and criminal investigation offers strikingly different conclusions. We review these findings and point to their implication for research on accident investigation in occupational health and safety contexts.     

松散式、汇编式的民法典不适合中国国情

民法典草案是原封不动地将现行法编入 ,是彻底的松散式和汇编式的 ,与人民所期望的民法典差距甚大。中国应当制定一部具有逻辑性和体系性的民法典 ,1 0 0年前 ,前人已经替我们作出了选择 ,在历经百年所形成的法律传统面前 ,任何立法者和学者都是渺小的。取消“债权”概念和“债权总则编”的理由站不住脚。人格权不应单独设编 ,基本理由在于人格权的特殊本质。     

论诱惑侦查"有限适用"理论及其借鉴

诱惑侦查"有限适用"理论来源于主要西方国家和欧洲人权法院对诱惑侦查的立法和司法实践,其基本精神是既不绝对地禁止诱惑侦查,但又不是无限制地滥用诱惑侦查,而是对诱惑侦查的适用采取严格限制的"有限适用";对于其限制条件,本文将其归纳为七个方面.在借鉴方面,本文针对我国学者对诱惑侦查的研究现状,结合我国法律的有关规定,重点研究和论述了侦查权的法律根据和理论基础、诱惑侦查的概念、性质、合法条件以及在诱惑侦查的场合中侦查人员和被告人的责任等重大理论问题.     

从滥用职权罪的罪过形式谈起——再探滥用职权罪

关于滥用职权罪的罪过形式,观点颇多,但实际上,其罪过形式只能是故意,包括直接故意和间接故意。司法实践中将本应定玩忽职守罪的过失行为,以及将虽出于故意但已构成其他更为严重犯罪的行为定为滥用职权罪的做法令人质疑。在目前情况下,应按照特别法优于普通法以及重法优于轻法的原则处理第397条滥用职权罪同其他相关条文间的法条竞合关系。另外,没有必要将滥用职权罪的主体再次恢复为“国家工作人员”,应提高和增设该罪的法定刑,将该罪和玩忽职守分列两个条文,重视对该罪未遂的惩处。