浅析中国婚内侵权救济制度

我国法律中没有建立起完善的婚内侵权救济制度。按目前法律规定,夫妻在婚内不能提起损害赔偿诉讼,离婚时损害赔偿诉讼也受到诸多限制。婚内侵权如何救济就成为法学界一个难题。从我国立法、司法实践出发,借鉴世界各国立法实践,从保护夫妻权利、尊重夫妻独立主体地位等考虑,应该建立以损害赔偿为主的婚内侵权救济制度,并可通过个人财产补偿、共同财产分割、诉讼时效中止等方式实现。     

关于《中华人民共和国婚姻法》的几个问题

<中国人民共和国婚姻法>细化了诸多法律条款,填补了某些立法空白,但仍有许多需修改与完善的地方违反夫妻忠实义务对对方造成侵害的,被害人应有权请求排除侵害和赔偿损失;借鉴外国立法,规定违反结婚程序的违法婚姻的效力;限定"感情确已破裂"的具体情形;离婚过错赔偿不应以请求权人无过失为限.     

对婚内强奸的理性分析与思考

婚内强奸是刑法学术界及司法界长期争论不休的问题.本文首先对各派观点进行了系统的梳理概括,又从比较法的视角考察了国外主要国家有关婚内强奸的法律制度,然后提出了婚内强奸研究的"权利义务说",进而以该学说为理论依据,对婚内强奸问题进行了法理分析与思考.     

‘She Knew What was Expected of Her’: The White Legal System’s Encounter with Traditional Marriage

A recent case in the Northern Territory of Australia has raised the issues of intra-racial rape and the legal recognition of traditional marriages between Indigenous people. The defendant in the Jamilmira case was charged with statutory rape of a 15-year-old girl. He argued that the girl’s status as his promised wife should lead to mitigation of his sentence. Members of the Northern Territory judiciary and others in the community were divided in their response to his claim. Ultimately the case led to reform of the law in relation to the recognition of traditional marriage, a response which outraged some members of the Indigenous community. In this article I examine the various representations of culture and individuals that were utilised by ‘the law’ and how these representations informed the legal response. In the process I question the limits of my own role as a ‘white middle-class feminist’ in the context of explorations of law and culture. Is there a space to become involved in these debates without being complicit in fostering racism and prejudice and without reverting to stereotypes and cultural arrogance?     

Intergroup Bias and Inequity: Legitimizing Beliefs and Policy Attitudes

Policy attitudes relating to group-based inequities are in many cases founded on tenuous legitimizing beliefs which are contradicted by empirical evidence. Policy issues, and their attendant legitimizing beliefs, are considered, including affirmative action, colorblindness/“racial privacy,” hate crime legislation, same-sex marriage, and, in greater depth, capital punishment and racial profiling. Primary themes underlying the legitimizing beliefs include denials that group-based biases and inequities exist, overestimations of the societal costs of inequity-reducing policies, valuing public safety above civil liberties, and discounting the adverse effects of inequity-reducing policies.     

质疑“补办结婚登记”——对婚姻法《解释（一）》第4、5条的异议

婚姻法<解释(一)>第4、5条有不完备之处1.离婚诉讼当事人不符合结婚条件;2含有逻辑矛盾;3补办登记不易实现;4.司法人员可能借此规定徇私裁判.所以新婚姻法第8条不合理.应在限制对象、限制条件上再行具体规定.     

婚内强奸应当犯罪化——从宪法学角度评婚内强奸

关于婚内强奸,我国刑法学界有否定说、肯定说、折衷说三种观点。从"同居权"不能成为一项权利、夫妻平等、活的秩序等宪法学的角度对婚内强奸的问题进行理论上的分析,可得出结论:婚内强奸应当构成犯罪。     

浅析我国婚姻法中的离婚损害赔偿制度

离婚损害赔偿制度是指配偶一方违法侵害他方的合法权益 ,导致婚姻关系破裂 ,离婚时过错配偶对无过错配偶所受的物质和精神损害承担民事责任的法律制度。我国 2 0 0 1年颁布的《婚姻法》专设“救助措施与法律责任”一章 ,新增了这一制度。这标志着我国婚姻家庭法制建设又走上了一个新的台阶 ,使法律对婚姻当事人合法权益的保护更进一步 ,使司法机关对相关案件进行裁判有了法律依据。本文首先对离婚损害赔偿制度的现实意义和内容加以介绍 ,又着重阐述了其亟待解决的几个问题。     

离婚诉权不平等之检讨——兼评我国《婚姻法》第34条

男女离婚诉权平等是平等的要求.在妇女怀孕期间、分娩后一年内和中止妊娠后六个月内限制男方离婚诉权不利于对女方、男方、子女权益和社会整体利益的保护,也违背了婚姻法自身体系的一致性,其实施效果也极差;它是计划经济体制下漠视诉权、固守传统婚恋观念、固守厌讼观念的产物.<婚姻法>第34条应废除.     

``That Woman Is a Woman!' the Case of Bellinger v. Bellinger and the Mysterious (Dis)appearance of Sex: Bellinger v. Bellinger [2003] 2 All E.R. 593; [2003] F.C.R. 1; [2003] 2 W.L.R. 1174; [2003] UKHL 21

In the case of Bellinger v. Bellingerthe House of Lords has for the first time exercised the power to make a declaration of incompatibility under s. 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998, finding that U.K. law on marriage is in breach of Articles 8 and 12 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This case note argues, however, that despite this decision, and despite also recent judgements of the European Court of Human Rights upholdingthe rights of transsexual people, the principles applied in Bellingerdemonstrate that judicial discourse on transsexuality remains bound within the heterosexual and biological framework of Corbett v. Corbett.