表见代理构成中的本人归责性要件——方法论角度的再思考

表见代理的构成,需要本人具有归责性。归责性的要件地位之确立,在价值实现和逻辑贯彻之外,尚有着重大的方法论意义。归责性具有程度之维,其要件地位的确立,使得一项比较权衡的框架得以建立,从而可通过本人归责性程度与相对人信赖合理性程度的比较权衡,来决定相应的法律构成和效果。从解释论的角度看,对于《合同法》第49条之规定,透过文义、历史、比较法等解释方法,可确立本人归责性的要件地位。     

准不动产的物权变动要件——《物权法》第24条及相关条款的解释与完善

通过对《物权法》第24条及相关条款进行文义解释与逻辑解释可知,准不动产物权（抵押权除外）的设立与转让实行“交付生效＋登记对抗”的规范模式。这种模式存在一定的缺陷,而且导致善意取得构成要件的解释结论限制了准不动产善意取得制度的适用范围。将来把《物权法》编入民法典时,应当对第24条、106条进行相应的修改。     

按份共有人优先购买权制度之适用——《物权法》第101条的解释与完善

我国《物权法》第101条关于按份共有人优先购买权制度的规定过于简约,存在诸多适用上的争议。作为制度分析的起点,应将按份共有人优先购买权的法律性质界定为形成权,从而以避免理论上的缺陷。从解释论的立场出发,可通过民法解释学的方法阐明《物权法》第101条前段的＂转让＂和＂份额＂的含义。在《物权法》第101条相关规定阙如的情形下,应通过比较法和规范意旨之分析,明确按份共有人优先购买权的行使、行使的效力和权利冲突等具体问题。     

案件事实与法律文本的解释之契合

借助于司法途径来解决纠纷,必然要面对法律适用的问题。法律被制定出来只有通过适用,才能实现其价值。适用法律就意味着要解释法律,因为适用法律不可能像自动售货机一样,输入法条就能得出舍乎正义的结论。我们将案件事实和法律文本以及法官在这一解释过程中的作用进行简要分析,找到那个在案件事实和法律文本之间交叉的契合点,从而得出合法合理的结论。这一契合点的寻找是处理案件的核心,它代表了正义观念的实现。     

恶意透支型信用卡诈骗的司法认定——兼评信用卡恶意透支行为最新司法解释

正确认定恶意透支,要注意以下问题：超额超期透支的理解、发卡行催收行为的界定、恶意透支的数额标准、恶意透支主体的确定及“非法占有为目的”的表现等。最新相关司法解释细化了恶意透支行为的认定标准,在诸多要素上有了新的规定,但在数额标准等方面也带来了一些新的问题,值得进一步讨论。     

探寻宪法解释的中国之路——读范进学教授《认真对待宪法解释》

宪法解释对于宪法研究和宪政建设都有着重要的作用。当前的宪法解释研究,应从理论体系的研究转向制度层面的实施,在尊重宪法文本权威的前提下,在维护现有宪政体制稳定性的基础上,运用宪法解释的方法来推动中国的宪法研究和宪政建设。     

Understanding Dworkin through art: object-based learning and law

This article explores object-based learning (OBL), a burgeoning pedagogical approach in higher education. Object-based learning engages students’ pre-existing visual and conceptual literacy as a gateway to work through difficult threshold concepts. The article advocates this exciting learning model in law by articulating what it is, explaining how it can be applied through the example of teaching Dworkin in a jurisprudence module. The article introduces OBL approaches, details how it is relevant to jurisprudential teaching as well as its scope for application across legal teaching. It explains how such an approach moves away from transmission modes of teaching into transformational ones, accessing students’ abstract web of comprehension in conjunction with text-based learning to produce more imaginative and creative critical thinking skills.     

The new progress in Chinese Arbitration Law

The Chinese Arbitration Law of 1995, together with the Civil Procedure Law and other sources of arbitration laws, is served as the legal bases for the Chinese arbitration system. Compared with advanced arbitration systems in the world, there still exist some defects of the Chinese Arbitration Law due to its lack of rich legislative experience and the conservative attitude toward arbitration. However, the Judicial Interpretation by the Supreme Court of China in 1995 makes a progress in Chinese Arbitration Law by strengthening the support to arbitration, but not playing the interventionist role of it.