基于事实契约理论的事实劳动关系重述

由于历史的原因,我国劳动法领域形成的关于"事实劳动关系是欠缺书面形式的劳动关系"之通说给劳动者权益保护带来了普遍和深远的损害,其理论依据被认为是德国学者豪普特教授提出的事实契约理论。实际上,根据事实契约理论,事实劳动关系是指无有效之劳动契约而提供从属劳动所形成的劳动关系。该理论虽遭激烈批评,但在有关身份的领域不可被传统契约理论所替代。在合意因欠缺生效要件而被认定无效之场合,事实契约理论为这类"被否定"的用工行为提供了"被承认"的新的理论框架和立法技术。我国《劳动合同法》对无效劳动合同的劳动者一方以民法式保护为原则,以劳动法式保护为例外,存在保护不足、保护过度及违背传统契约法形式理性等问题,需作进一步的反思与调整。     

法官庭外调查权的合理性质疑

法官庭外调查权是职权主义诉讼模式的一个重要特征 ,我国修改后的刑事诉讼法对此进行了保留。但是 ,由于它混淆了侦查与审判的职能 ,违背了诉审分离的原则 ,破坏了法官的中立形象 ,损害了审判的公正 ,给诉讼理论和司法实践都造成了混乱 ,因此 ,建议取消法官的庭外调查权 ,相应地完善有关的配套措施。     

UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF RECIPROCITY REQUIREMENT FOR RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS IN JAPAN

This article deals with reciprocity requirement for recognition of foreign judgments in Japan. Following German law, Japanese law requires reciprocity to the rendering state in addition to the jurisdiction of the state, the service of process, and the compatibility with Japanese public policy. Although Japanese courts have rarely refused the recognition of foreign judgments for lack of reciprocity for a long time, some Chinese judgments recently have not been recognized for this reason. The author clarifies first with historical review what was the purpose of the Japanese legislator, when the original law of 1890 required the reciprocity by international treaties, and when later the reform law of 1926 required the simple reciprocity that is similarly provided in the current law. The author surveys then the Japanese case law concerning the reciprocity requirement after the reform of 1926. The author focuses further on the reciprocity between Japan and China and compares the Japanese practice with the German one that led to a different result. Last, it is concluded that the reciprocity requirement is contrary to the protection of human rights under Japanese constitution.