试论我国产品责任的归责原则

产品责任是经济法的重要组成部分,而归责原则又是产品责任的核心问题。对我国关于产品责任归责原则诸多观点进行分析,我国产品责任的归责原则只能适用严格责任。     

诉讼法在我国法律体系中的地位

传统的一元体系没有反映出法律体系的真正客观需要。法律体系应当是二元化的结构 ,首先是划分为公法和私法 ,并将这种划分作为整个法律现象的内在的不同系统。其次 ,法律体系的二元结构也表现在实体法和程序法的划分之中 ,而且具有不同的层次性。诉讼法无疑是程序法中的一部分 ,而又只能是其中的一部分 ,是其中最具特点和最具保障手段的一部分。诉讼法的以公有权力为基础的权力性质和当事人以私权为基础的诉讼性质决定了其既不可单纯的成为公法 ,也不可脱离公法而成立 ,而成为界乎私法和公法之间的、程序性、保障性的法律门类。     

试论中国产品质量的归责原则

我国法学 (学术 )界对中国产品质量的归责问题有几种不同的观点 :第一种是“过失责任说” ;第二种是“过错推定说” ;第三种是“视为有过错说” ;第四种是“严格责任说”或“无过错责任说” ;第五种是“综合责任说”。第五种观点既总结了以往法学界在产品责任归责上的研究成果 ,又结合了《产品质量法》的规定 ,基本上反映了我国产品责任的法律现状。然而我国目前的《产品质量法》处罚仍偏轻。加重处罚 ,提高法律的可操作性是进一步完善《产品责任法》或《产品质量法》的两个重要方面     

对刑法"不得假释"之规定(81条第二款)的商榷

限制假释与世界行刑现代化方向不吻合。对假释在实践中存在的问题应具体分析,但不能因噎废食。我国限制假释的理论依据值得商榷,事实表明:限制假释不利于调动在监服刑犯的改造积极性,不利于他们的重新社会化过程,与监狱法中对罪犯实行惩罚与改造相结合的原则不符;同时,在维护社会的稳定以及体现法律的公正、衔接等方面并非是一个较好的选择。所以,建议对该刑法条款进行修改,并通过对我国假释管理体制的完善,逐步扩大对假释的适用。     

律师刑事责任豁免权必要性刍议

目前 ,我国律师在刑事执业中困难重重 ,不利于对犯罪嫌疑人、被告人合法权益的保护 ,最主要的原因是律师在刑事执业中风险太大。赋予律师在刑事诉讼中豁免权有利于实现设立律师制度的目的 ,维护弱者权利 ,维护最基本人权 ,同时也是跟国际相接轨的现实需要。     

Divorcing Responsibly

In this article I argue that Part II of the Family LawAct 1996 gives expression to a new form ofresponsibility. I begin by suggesting thatresponsible behaviour has shifted from prohibiting orrequiring particular actions: we now exhibitresponsibility by our attitude towards our actions. I then examine where this new conception ofresponsibility has come from. Through an examinationof the work of post-liberal theorists, principallyMichael Sandel, I argue that a changing view ofpersonhood within post-liberal theory has led to aquestioning of the possibility of choice, and that theabsence of choice necessitates a shift in thedefinition of responsible behaviour. If we are createdby our decisions then we cannot be held to account forour decisions, but only for the care we have takenover them. Responsibility is therefore measured notby our level of self-control but by our level ofself-awareness. Finally I examine the consequences ofthis shift in the meaning of responsibility. Withinthis framework autonomy is illusory thereforedecisions do not need to be respected. This explainswhy the implementation of Part II of the Family LawAct 1996 has been called into question. Within thisframework responsibility is relative therefore itextends indefinitely. This enables the Family Law Actto be uniquely intrusive and judgmental: everydivorcing couple, on being held up to scrutiny, isfound lacking.     

Harm,Consent and the Limits of Privacy

Within the context of U.K. law, the right to respect for private life, articulated in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and acknowledged more opaquely in domestic legislation and case law, is one whose scope is unclear. Nowhere is this brought into sharper relief than in cases where conduct which manifests a person’s sexual identity, or concerns her intimate relations with others, is prima facie criminal. In this essay I attempt, through a discussion of cases in which injury is caused in the context of relationships experienced inter-subjectively as private, to explore the contexts in which the law is prepared to legitimate that inter-subjective experience, and where it is not. Using cases in which injury has been caused purposively (in S/M sex), and incidentally (through the reckless transmission of HIV during sexual intercourse), the essay argues that the law is prepared to respect the right to respect for private life only in so far as the private life concerned is one which reinforces traditional gender roles and relationship types; in short, a life that one would be prepared to live publicly.     

实现程序正义的双重保障体制

近年来,学术界对"重实体,轻程序"等错误做法给予了批评,但仅停留在重视程序的非工具性价值的问题上还远远不够,应当设计出实现程序正义的法制途径,使程序正义落到实处。文章拟就国情,寻求程序正义实现的思想保障,探求程序正义实现的制度保障,完善有中国特色社会主义法律体系,促使程序正义以渐进式的、多元化的方式逐步影响我们的社会,最终成为中国的"法治"精神。     

完善我国产品责任立法的几点建议

产品质量和产品责任问题已成为非常突出的社会问题,有必要借鉴他国产品责任立法,扩大"产品"的范围,明确产品"缺陷"的定义,确立严格责任原则,增设惩罚性赔偿制度,扩大产品责任义务主体的范围,扩大保护对象的范围,不断完善我国产品责任立法。     

程序法与实体法关系的法理学评析

在实体法和程序法的关系问题上,近年在质疑和批判传统上占主流的“程序工具主义“的过程中出现的“程序至上论“、“价值补充论“、“内容决定论“等,都经不起唯物辩证法的批判性考察.“平行论“的观点是正确的,因为实体法与程序法既相互依赖、互为前提,又相互分离、相互独立,并相互渗透、相互贯通.进一步看,程序法可以弥补实体法的不足,程序问题优先于实体问题,程序应当先行.