《公司法》有关公司对外担保新规定的质疑

新修改的《公司法》有关公司对外担保问题的规定,对于规范公司担保秩序有一定的积极意义,但是这些规定也有明显的局限性,主要表现在:规则的自律性和强制性交融,担保的合法有效性未得到明确;法条过于简洁,牺牲了规则的精确性,导致规则的不确定性;过度追求交易安全,片面要求股东大会对担保事项决议,损害交易效率;未给特殊的公司类型留下特别的空间,妨碍公司日常业务的合法开展;法律本身的缺憾加上有关监管规章的未紧密配套,使得有关缺憾更加明显。     

Casting Aside Clanking Medieval Chains: Prerogative,Statute and Article 50 after the EU Referendum

This article confronts the controversies surrounding Article 50 by analysing the relationship between statute and prerogative in the UK. The piece focuses on domestic constitutional issues and suggests a new way of classifying the relationship between statute and prerogative into two types falling under ‘the abeyance principle’ or ‘the frustration principle’. The abeyance principle means that where statute and prerogative overlap, the prerogative goes into abeyance. The frustration principle means that where statute and prerogative give rise to potential inconsistencies, but do not overlap, the prerogative cannot be used inconsistently with the intention of parliament as expressed in the relevant legislation. It then argues that Article 50 has the status of primary or ‘primary‐equivalent’ legislation which could justify applying the abeyance principle. This would mean that the trigger power would be exercised on statutory authority rather than through prerogative powers. If the courts are unable thus to construe the relevant legislation it argues EU law requires the courts to bridge the gap. Alternatively, if the abeyance principle is not applicable, it argues the frustration principle could apply but the circumstances in this litigation fall outside it. In the further alternative, EU law could require the frustration principle itself to be set aside in this case.     

雇主不当劳动行为的民事救济——基于我国和美国不当劳动行为救济制度之比较

我国《工会法》第52条规定的责令雇主承担不当劳动行为的民事责任,与美国《国家劳资关系法》第10(c)条的规定看起来很相似,相比之下,这一规范在美国劳动法的实践中很有效,在我国却极少被适用,解释方面也存在较大的分歧。美国是世界上最早创设不当劳动行为救济制度的国家,从《瓦格纳法》规定的雇主不当劳动行为的禁止规范及救济措施,到《塔夫托—哈特莱法》将适用对象扩大到工会和雇员,在雇用自由原则和劳资自治模式的背景下,其演变始终以保护雇员团结权的松紧程度和收放态度为线索。我国《工会法》现正处于第三次修改阶段,适时检讨第52条的解释和适用的障碍,还可以解决其与《劳动合同法》规范的竞合问题。     

性别歧视的人口后果——基于公共政策视角的模拟分析

性别歧视导致的“失踪女孩”现象对中国人口发展产生了影响。从制度、文化、经济和政策4个方面分析了中国性别歧视的成因,并结合中国政府采取的有助于降低性别歧视的公共政策,提出了相应的政策体系。根据人口模拟模型,对建议的公共政策效果进行了模拟,定量分析了不同性别歧视程度对中国人口发展的影响。结果表明,性别歧视减少了人口总量和劳动适龄人口总数,加快了人口老化程度,加剧了婚姻市场的挤压。通过性别歧视下人口发展模拟的结果,为降低男孩偏好、消除性别歧视提供经验支持,为政府制定和执行相应的公共政策提供依据。     

对《公务员法》“违法命令不执行”条款的思考

《中华人民共和国公务员法》“违法命令不执行”条款规定的“违法命令”应该既包括具体行政命令,也包括抽象行政命令。但是该条款表述模糊,有可能导致执行中的混乱,可借鉴有关国家的规定予以改进。对于抽象违法命令不执行的情况在实践中可能存在潜在的困境,可以在适当的时候考虑扩大“违法命令”的范围,把规章纳入其中,从而赋予行政机关对于规章规范直接的选择适用权。     

Divorcing Responsibly

In this article I argue that Part II of the Family LawAct 1996 gives expression to a new form ofresponsibility. I begin by suggesting thatresponsible behaviour has shifted from prohibiting orrequiring particular actions: we now exhibitresponsibility by our attitude towards our actions. I then examine where this new conception ofresponsibility has come from. Through an examinationof the work of post-liberal theorists, principallyMichael Sandel, I argue that a changing view ofpersonhood within post-liberal theory has led to aquestioning of the possibility of choice, and that theabsence of choice necessitates a shift in thedefinition of responsible behaviour. If we are createdby our decisions then we cannot be held to account forour decisions, but only for the care we have takenover them. Responsibility is therefore measured notby our level of self-control but by our level ofself-awareness. Finally I examine the consequences ofthis shift in the meaning of responsibility. Withinthis framework autonomy is illusory thereforedecisions do not need to be respected. This explainswhy the implementation of Part II of the Family LawAct 1996 has been called into question. Within thisframework responsibility is relative therefore itextends indefinitely. This enables the Family Law Actto be uniquely intrusive and judgmental: everydivorcing couple, on being held up to scrutiny, isfound lacking.     

Finger in the Dyke or the Floodgates Stemmed? Sections 29–40 of the Employment Act 2002

This article considers Sections 29–40 of the Employment Act 2002 in the context of post-War developments in labour relations culminating in the National Industrial Relations Court. It considers the development of Employment Tribunal which rather than being the last resort intended by the legislators, has become the first resort of complainants, often for trivial matters by employees; or by employers taking an extremely broad view of Gross Misconduct by employees. Due to the volume of cases and the shortage of Chairs, cases are constantly delayed and postponed. The article posits that these are the principle reason behind the framing of Sections 29–40 of the Employment Act 2002 which introduced a new Section 9(1)(a) into the Employment Tribunals Act 1995. This has given the Chair of an Employment Tribunal the authority to strike out a weak case at a Pre-Hearing Review that will strike the case out once and for all at this juncture. The aim is to encourage employers to have proper procedures and for employees to follow them. This article suggests that in fact the reforms will have the opposite effect; that they have introduced another layer of legal complexity which will further increase the number of cases brought before the Employment Tribunal.     

《国家赔偿法》修订后的几大亮点

历经十五年争议的《国家赔偿法》终于修订颁布,新法在归责原则、执法机关的举证责任、刑事拘留导致赔偿的责任确定、公民的精神损害赔偿、民主与平等精神、赔偿程序的合理规范等六个方面较之从前有很大完善,标志着我国宪政制度的巨大进步以及对人权保障的提升。     

Human Rights and Unfair Dismissal: Private Acts in Public Spaces

This article addresses the termination of employment because of the conduct of the employee in her leisure time, in the light of the right to private life. It explores the impact on the retention of employment of activities taking place outside the workplace and outside working hours, and argues that the approach of UK courts and tribunals, which is based on a primarily spatial conceptualisation of privacy, is flawed. A fresh approach to privacy, resting on the idea of domination, is proposed, which is sensitive to the particularities of the employment relationship. Considering the fairness enquiry in dismissal, it argues that off‐duty conduct may lead to lawful termination of employment only if there is a clear and present impact or a high likelihood of such impact on business interests; a speculative and marginal danger does not suffice. It further proposes that a particularly meticulous test is appropriate when certain suspect categories, such as the employees' sexual preferences, are at stake.