试论技术入股股东的权利、义务与法律责任

技术出资方式迥然不同于货币、实物、土地使用权等出资方式,技术入股股东不仅具有其他股东的权利、义务与法律责任,而且还具有自己的特殊权利、特殊义务与特殊法律责任。从技术入股角度出发,《中华人民共和国公司法》有关股东权利、义务与法律责任的规定需要充实。     

工人阶级仍然是当代我国最先进的阶级

要回答中国工人阶级是否先进的问题,必须首先掌握先进性的衡量标准,并用其对中国工人阶级进行具体分析。     

Fundamental principles of the international protection system of intellectual property rights and the applications

Legal principle, which underlies the value of the legal system, is supposed to be the origin and basis of concrete legal rules. It has also resulted from abstracting and summarizing the value and spirit of these legal rules. In light of the universality and hierarchy of legal principle, the principles of the international protection system of intellectual property rights (IPR) can be divided into the following two types: one is the fundamental principles applied to the what, why and how a legal system shall be constructed, such as principles of sovereignty, equality and mutual benefit, joint development, and international cooperation, which also can be expressed as the principles of sovereignty, international coordination and cooperation, fairness and justice. The other type includes those existing in the legal system and capable of being applied directly, such as the principle of national treatment, principle of minimum standard, principle of independence (for industrial property right), principle of independent protection (for copyright), principle of compulsory implementing patent (for patent right) and doctrine of priority (for industrial property right), etc. In my opinion, the principles of the international protection system of IPR shall follow the latter model, indicating that they shall be provided and written in the international conventions on the grounds that they can be applied directly, and that they can be universally applied to the whole international protection system of IPR instead of exclusive application to one certain system. Hereupon, the author believes that principles concerning the international protection system of IPR should include the principles of national treatment, minimum protection standard and public interest.     

对法律事实建构论的初步阐释——以主体间性为分析进路的思考

诉讼法学界关于客观真实与法律真实的争论是针对法律事实的认定标准所产生的分歧,但是,争论并没有跳出主观与客观、事实与价值、形式与实质这种二元对立的思维模式。而要探究法律事实的形成,必须重新考察诉讼活动的性质,进而实现分析进路由主体性向主体间性的转换。法律事实建构论的提出就是这种分析进路转换之后的结果,但值得注意的是,我们必须对法律事实建构论的限度保持必要的警醒。     

To Wonderland Through the Looking-glass: Conceiving a Critical Legal Argument for Contractual Justice in the South African Law of Contract †

The aim of this paper is to identify the possible substructure (looking glass/es) of a critical legal argument for contractual justice (Wonderland) in the South African law of contract. South African contract law still fails, ten years after the constitutional transformation, to reflect the constitutional ideals of freedom, equality and human dignity in an acceptable manner. I argue that this disposition places a question mark over the legitimacy of contract law and marginalizes opportunities for the social change envisaged by the Constitution. The paper explores Duncan Kennedy’s Form and Substance-argument and indicates that the reluctance to accommodate these values may be attributable to the fact that the majority of role-players position themselves on the individualism/rules side of Kennedy’s continuum – a paradigm that perceives the law of contract as a body of positivistic rules to be applied neutrally and regardless of the social or socio-economic distortions its application may generate. In an attempt to move away from this traditional approach, the privileged paradigm is criticised. A typical CLS-approach is followed which employs sociology, psychological jurisprudence and game theory to criticise the law from outside the restrictive realms of law itself. Simultaneously, I attempt to illuminate the argument for a shift (step through the looking glass) to another paradigm. I conclude that our judiciary finds itself in a position similar to that of Plato’s prisoners in the cave and will not reach the point where they apply relevant (constitutional) values directly to contractual disputes. The State is thus responsible for infusing contract law with contractual justice, by implementing legislation to this effect in order to limit the hegemonic consequences of the judiciary’s obsession with freedom of contract and utopian rules, which fail in reality to further the ideal of justice. Paper presented at the Critical Legal Conference, 4 September 2004, London, UK. This paper is dedicated to the memory of the late Judge of Appeal, Mr. Justice P.J. Olivier. The paper is based on research conducted for the thesis in partial fulfilment of the degree LLD in the Faculty of Law at the University of Pretoria under the title ‘A critical legal argument for contractual justice in the South African law of contract.’ The degree supervisor is Professor Karin van Marle in the Department of Legal History, Comparative Law and Jurisprudence. The author wishes to thank the following persons for valuable deliberations and input: Karin van Marle, Graham Bradfield and Anashri Pillay. In addition, the author wishes to acknowledge and thank the University of Cape Town for financially supporting this research. †Paper presented at the Critical Legal Conference, 4 September 2004, London, UK. This paper is dedicated to the memory of the late Judge of Appeal, Mr. Justice P.J. Olivier. The paper is based on research conducted for the thesis in partial fulfilment of the degree LLD in the Faculty of Law at the University of Pretoria under the title ‘A critical legal argument for contractual justice in the South African law of contract.’ The degree supervisor is Professor Karin van Marle in the Department of Legal History, Comparative Law and Jurisprudence. The author wishes to thank the following persons for valuable deliberations and input: Karin van Marle, Graham Bradfield and Anashri Pillay. In addition, the author wishes to acknowledge and thank the University of Cape Town for financially supporting this research. apply relevant (constitutional) values directly to contractual disputes. The State is thus responsible for infusing contract law with contractual justice, by implementing legislation to this effect in order to limit the hegemonic consequences of the judiciary’s obsession with freedom of contract and utopian rules, which fail in reality to further the ideal of justice.     

从东西法学文化的融合谈要约的法律性质

大陆法系以民事法律关系为核心的民法理论体系在中国业已形成 ,诸多英美法系的概念在合同法的立法过程中又被吸收到中国来 ,要约便是其中之一。这两者如何融合 ,使民法理论体系得以理顺 ,不但有理论意义 ,而且颇具现实意义。把要约定性为民事法律行为 ,可以使许多问题迎刃而解。     

完善我国民营企业间接融资法律制度的思考

就民营企业融资而言,最合适的融资方式是利用银行等金融机构进行间接融资。目前民营企业间接融资的法律障碍,已成为束缚民营企业间接融资顺利进行的瓶颈,完善间接融资的法律制度,扫除相关法律障碍势在必行、刻不容缓。     

简论以法治腐--学习邓小平反腐倡廉思想

邓小平反腐败思想的一个重要特点就是把治理腐败与民主法制建设紧密地结合起来,这不仅为我们指出了防治腐败的根本方法,也为我国政治现代化建设提供了一个整体思路.     

政治文明与我国法制现代化的发展

政治文明作为人类社会政治生活的进步状态和人类在政治实践活动中形成的文明成果,是一个以制度建设为主干,包括政党政治、民主政治、法治政治的完整体系。其实质就是要实现政治结构、政治活动和政治制度的法治化。因此,政治文明的发展必然会推动和促进法制现代化的发展。     

金融调控法与金融监管法关系论

根据法理学有关法律部门调整对象单一性的理论,金融法并不是一个独立的法律部门,而是由金融调控法、金融监管法以及金融交易法等三部分组成。但长期以来,经济法学研究忽略了这一点,尤其是在宏观调控法的研究上,即表现为随意把与金融调控法性质迥异的金融监管法或金融交易法划入宏观调控法体系。当然,如果说金融交易法与金融调控法的区别还是比较明显的话,金融监管法与金融调控法之间则确实存在着让人容易混淆的地方;为此,我们必须从调整对象、法律行为以及法律渊源三方面入手,对金融监管法与金融调控法的差异作出区分与比较,以求对金融法与宏观调控法的理论研究有所裨益。