农民专业合作社责任制度的完善——合作社成员承诺责任的引入

农民专业合作社并不具有独立的财产所有权,其拥有的是包括成员出资等在内的财产支配权.基于<农民专业合作社法>的规定,合作社支配的财产具有虚无性与变动性的特点,不能实现明确成员以及合作社承担财产责任界限、保障合作社交易对象信赖利益和维护市场交易安全的立法目标,进而会损害合作社交易相对人的信赖利益以及合作社自身利益和市场交易机会,并阻碍合作社的长期发展.为了进一步完善农民专业合作社的责任制度,在考察<公司法>责任制度、以财政补助为核心的责任制度的基础上,应当在现有<农民专业合作社法>关于合作社及其成员的责任制度的基础上构建成员承诺责任制度.     

不明抛掷物致人损害相关法律制度适用分析

对于高楼不明抛掷物致人损害的侵权责任,学界有人认为或者适用《民法通则》第126条建筑物、搁置物、悬挂物责任的规定,或者适用《民法通则》第132条的公平责任规定,或者适用共同危险行为理论来处理。但这些制度或理论有其内在规定性,都不能成为高楼不明抛掷物致人损害案件处理的依据,类似的案件不能在我国现行侵权法的法律制度框架下得到合理的解决。     

对我国道路交通事故损害赔偿归责原则的理解及适用

理解和适用我国道路交通事故损害赔偿归责原则,首先应把握交通事故损害赔偿责任的性质;其次应厘清道路交通事故损害赔偿责任与道路交通事故责任的关系;再次应区分不同情况,采取不同方式,适用不同的归责原则,     

食品安全与国家安全

近年来连续不断地发生食品安全事件,伤害了消费者的身心健康,影响了中国产品的出口贸易,丑化了中国产品的国际形象,在一定程度上威胁了我国的国家安全.从国家安全的角度来分析食品安全问题,预防和减少食品安全事件的发生,就要加强国家间交流,积极建立合作平台;对内提升食品安全意识,对外改善食品国际形象;建立国家食品安全体系,加强政府监管,提高我国的食品质量,从而更有效地维护国家安全.     

产品责任的归责原则

产品责任的归责原则是行为人承担产品责任的依据,是研究产品责任法律制度的核心,是整个产品责任法律规范的基础。由于我国产品责任的归责原则法律规定不统一,致使在产品责任诉讼中不能有效的保护公民的合法权利。本文就产品责任的归责原则做了论述,以期对产品责任的归责原则的确定有更加充分的认识。     

论工伤事故多种补偿机制的适用关系

随着各国法律制度的健全,对于工伤事故人身伤害出现了多元的赔偿或补偿机制。我国现阶段处理工伤保险与民事损害赔偿之间的适用关系,建议借鉴多数国家所采用的补充模式。工伤保险与人身保险中的意外伤害保险等险种,不存在重复给付问题。处理工伤保险与雇主责任险、公众责任险、机动车责任保险、交通事故社会救助基金的竞合关系时,要避免重复给付。     

对经济法责任的应然分析

经济法责任“应该是什么”的问题需要在新的视野和新的法理背景下展开分析,法律关系的复杂化以及“角色决定责任”的规则应予优先考虑。经济法责任由经济法所作用的社会生活领域、经济法调整的宗旨和价值追求、经济法主体的权义结构以及经济法主体违法行为的表现形态、性质等内在要素所决定,有其特定性。经济法主体依据角色、行为与后果的不同关联,各自承担不同形态的法律责任。     

Repositioning the corporate criminal: comparing and contrasting corporate criminal liability in Canada and Finland

ABSTRACT

Over the past two decades, a number of states in the Global North have introduced laws aimed at holding corporations criminally liable. While there is an important literature examining these legal regimes there is a paucity of comparative work interrogating the different political struggles and processes leading to corporate criminal liability (CCL) legislation. This paper addresses this lacuna by comparing and contrasting the development of CCL in Canada and Finland. By scrutinizing the law reform processes in each jurisdiction, the paper documents how CCL emerged under different conjunctures in each country, yet were shaped similarly by hegemonic beliefs in the non-criminal status of corporation, the importance of advancing private enterprise and established jurisprudence. Of particular note are the ways in which dominant notions of legal individualism and the universal legal subject constrained legislative efforts to hold corporations criminally to account therein preventing corporate misconduct from being processed as “real” crimes.     

Hyperlinking under the lens of the revamped right of communication to the public

For more than a decade now, the right of communication to the public has been developed and interpreted by the CJEU, leading to a complex set of criteria that must be analysed on a case-by-case basis. When confronted with the copyright status of hyperlinking, the Court built upon that background in a string of cases that ended up reshaping the traditional contours of the exclusive right. The practice of linking, an essential element of the Internet and a crucial tool for any online activity carried out by entities and individuals, is now affected by the new scope of the communication to the public right, with direct consequences on the liability hyperlinkers may incur. This article will examine the status of the Court's case law to provide insights that may facilitate its interpretation and application. It will consider in particular how hyperlinkers are exposed to liability and which duties of care result from the Court's approach. It will also examine how the new understanding of hyperlinks from a copyright perspective may be relevant in the context of the proposed Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market.     

The right to be forgotten: The Israeli version

The right to be forgotten and erase, originally introduced in the well-known case of Google Spain, has caused considerable legal debates on both theoretical and procedural issues. The Israeli Supreme Court has also just recently considered the issue when it was asked to enforce the right to be forgotten of an Israeli advocate, Jonathan Miller, and delist harmful information which appeared in a Google search, and was in truth related to a different adv. Jonathan Miller. The plaintiff relied on the Israeli Prohibition of Defamation Law. Liability was denied on the basis that the information was indeed true, and thus- justified. We suggest in this article that the court should have imposed liability in negligence, an open ended general tort that mainly applies when particular torts fail to supply a reasonable and just solution in new factual situations due to change in social, economic and technological circumstances.