《民法典》第157条(法律行为无效之法律后果)评注

本条中“民事法律行为”既包括财产行为也包括身份行为,既包括负担行为也包括处分行为;“确定不发生效力”既包括效力待定法律行为终未获追认、已成立终未获审批的情形,也包括法律行为未成立的情形。本条中“财产”包括一切可转让的利益,就权利移转型合同而言,财产返还请求权系物权性的回复原状请求权,它主要指有形财产的占有回复和权利簿册记载的回复。折价补偿请求权为特殊的不当得利请求权,在合同无效清算场合,应一般性禁用《民法典》第986条得利丧失抗辩规则。损害赔偿请求权是一种特殊的缔约过失赔偿请求权,可适用于双方明知或应知合同违法、背俗而无效的场合。本条并非宣示性条款,它规定了三项独立的请求权基础。在法律对建设工程合同等特殊合同以及其他法律行为无效另有特别规定时,应各依该特别规定处理。     

冲之鸟礁法律地位的国际法思考

日本认定冲之鸟礁的法律地位是“岛屿”，多年来一直企图将冲之鸟礁“岛屿化”，从而获得专属经济区和大陆架的权益。根据《联合国海洋法公约》的规定，冲之鸟礁作为岩礁的法律地位是不应当有争议的。因此，冲之鸟礁不具备岛屿的社会属性，对冲之鸟礁的人工添附也不能改变其作为岩礁的法律地位。     

同步录音录像制度运行中的若干问题探析-以福建省职务犯罪案件为观察对象

我国法律没有规定刑事案件侦查讯问时同步录音录像的性质，所以对于同步录音的认识不一。这种情况已经对同步录音录像的规范运用产生重要的影响。基于实证调研的数据，可以对同步录音录像制度在实务中的运行状况、程序规范、存在的问题、同步录音录像的实务运用与效用进行全面的梳理。在此基础上，对同步录音录像性质与定位的争议等问题进行了回应。同步录音录像可作为侦查讯问行为合法性证据和口供补强证据，但一般情况下不能作为案件实体事实的证据。     

论死亡保险金的非遗产化处理——基于对《保险法》第四十二条第一款的分析

我国《保险法》第42条第1款规定,死亡保险金在无指定受益人的情形下作为被保险人的遗产,由保险人依照继承法的规定履行给付保险金的义务.该规定混淆了死亡保险金与遗产,受益权与继承权,以及保险关系与继承关系.死亡保险金不能成为被保险人的遗产,《保险法》第42条第1款应当按照保险金的本来属性进行修改.保险法应当建立法定受益人制度,以解决无指定受益人情形下保险金的给付问题.     

The special role of foreign legal history in China in the construction of a new legal system

The development of the Chinese legal system is based on the learning of foreign legal systems. Foreign legal history, as one of the elementary courses in higher legal education, is becoming a driving force for China’s progress toward the rule of law and is playing an indispensible role in the construction of Chinese legal system by educating, cultivating and academic exchanging. The discipline of Foreign Legal History not only provides diverse perspectives for the construction of a new Chinese legal system, but also testifies the establishment of the rule of law in China. It not only benefits Chinese legal system, but also makes contribution to the cultivation of the new generation of Chinese legal talents. Therefore, we should insist on learning from the legal cultural heritage embedded in Foreign Legal History for the purpose of developing Chinese legal system.     

Studies of foreign legal history in china over the past 60 years

This article gives a detailed review of the evolution of the Chinese study of Foreign Legal History over the past 60 years. It covers five aspects: academic conferences, Chinese translated works on Foreign Legal History, the education of Chinese scholars in this field, academic activities and contestations, and the prospect of Foreign Legal History as a discipline. This article aims to tease out the achievements and problems of the studies of Foreign Legal History and analyze the social conditions underlying these problems and achievements. It concludes that the reconstruction of Chinese legal system and the development of Chinese legal system cannot stand in isolation from the process of absorbing, transplanting, and learning from foreign jurisprudence and legal systems. Though Foreign Legal History might not become a hot topic, it remains of great significance to the Chinese understanding of law.     

被害人陈述之比较研究

被害人陈述作为我国一类独立的刑事证据 ,它与美国被害人影响陈述截然不同 ,也与犯罪嫌疑人、被告人供述和辩解及证人证言存在着程度不同的差异。对它们进行比较研究 ,既有利于正确揭示被害人陈述的特征 ,合理界定它在未来刑事证据立法中的地位 ,也可以借鉴美国被害人影响陈述制度 ,加强我国刑事诉讼中的被害人人权保障。     

民事诉讼中当事人商定举证期限与法院指定举证期限之应然关系

确定一个合理的举证期限既是科学设置举证时限制度的必备内容,也是其得以良性运作的重要前提。对于举证期限的确定,有关司法解释虽然明确了当事人商定和法院指定两种不同的方式,但却没有能够作出细致的规制。鉴于此,本文分析了有关规定在司法实践中存在的主要问题,检讨了当事人商定举证期限和法院指定举证期限各自的利弊得失,并在此基础上为进一步理顺二者之间的应然关系提出了完善建议。     

The curious case of Housing First: the limits of evidence based policy

Evidence Based Policy has been articulated and practiced in Europe, particularly under the ‘New Labour’ policies of the former Labour government in the United Kingdom. In the United States, the impact of research on policy has been inconsistent due to differing relationships between researchers and policy makers. This paper gives an overview of evidence based policy and presents critiques based on its reliance on positivist methods and technical approach to policy making. Using these critiques as a framework, the paper discusses the case of Housing First, a policy adopted by the Bush Administration in order to address the problem of chronic homelessness. The case is an example of research driven policy making but also resulted in a progressive policy being promoted by a conservative administration. In discussing the case, the paper elaborates on the relationship between evidence and policy, arguing that evidence based policy fails to integrate evidence and values into policy deliberations. The paper concludes with alternative models of policy decision making and their implications for research.     

执行前和解协议法律效力研究

生效裁判确定的权利义务,当事人有权进行处分;当事人在执行前达成和解协议,应当理解为履行义务、处分权利的表现形式;执行前和解协议本质上是以生效裁判确定的义务为基础和前提,双方履行该义务达成的民事协议,应当具有可争议性和可诉性;对执行前和解协议进行审理和裁判应当以生效裁判作为事实基础,不构成重复诉讼,也不违背生效裁判的既判力;执行前和解协议仅仅具有实体法效果,而执行程序中达成的执行和解协议则同时具有程序法和实体法双重效力。