债权形式主义下物权行为有限存在之三维分析及立法建构

民法学界关于物权行为的讨论并未系统、深入,从事实、规范、价值三维角度分析债权形式主义下 应有物权行为的有限存在空间,且和债权行为一样均可单独引发物权变动,但不存在独立性与无 因性问题,并提出了立法建构模式。     

我国城市规划法制的现状与展望

二十世纪八十年代以来,我国逐渐形成了数量繁多、相对较为齐全的城市规划法制体系.但由于受到指导思想、发展水平等主客观因素的制约,目前,我国城市规划法制在实践中出现了诸多弊端和不足.我国必须对城市规划的法制进行科学、理性的整合与完善.这种整合与完善应当以科学的可持续发展观为指导,应体现社会的公平性与正义性,注重对环境、对有关利益主体的权益保障.     

婚约法律问题研究

婚约是婚姻关系建立前的习惯性程序,经历了从罗马法、寺院法到近现代法的不同发展时期,产生的法律效力也各有不同。婚约在我国是一种重要的民事习惯,历代封建统治者都十分重视对婚约关系的调整。婚约的成立应以当事人自愿自行订立、具有完全民事行为能力、未婚及无禁止结婚的血亲关系为条件,依法成立的婚约对双方当事人及第三人均产生一定的法律效力。婚约存续期间双方互赠的财物,在婚约解除时应按不当得利予以返还。一方擅自解除婚约或因他方过错而解除婚约的,无过错方可请求损害赔偿。将婚约视为纯粹的道德问题,不仅人为地缩小了民法的调整范围,也不利于财产纠纷的解决,应通过民法典的制定予以规范。     

从伦理规则到生活法则——中国传统法律制度史的另类解读

从长时段考察中国传统法律的发展和演变,特别是国家制定法的发展和演变,就可发现这样一个明显的规律:从伦理规则向生活规则的演变,这一点在有关民事方面的法律里面表现得更为明显。这一演变过程是漫长的,甚至是残酷的。它提醒我们,法律的作用不应过分夸大,立法时应注意听取民众的意见。     

侦查讯问制度与对抗制庭审制度之价值协同问题研究

侦查讯问具有结果价值和程序价值。这两种价值的不同追求决定着侦查讯问的诉讼结构,而且该结构一般与庭审方式保持了相同的理念运作。然而从我国1996年刑诉改革以来,对抗制特色庭审方式与强职权侦查讯问方式存在着不可调和的价值冲突,以至司法实践中两种制度难以对接运作,问题颇多。     

论税收法治意识的培育

中国税收法治意识淡薄的历史原因包含历史传统、体制、法制、社会意识等多个层面。在税收法制建设中 ,应从治国方略、立法程序、队伍建设、教育宣传、监督机制等方面加强税收法治意识的培育。     

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。     

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.     

经济法的价值取向和基本原则

经济法作为国家协调社会经济的基本法律 ,其价值取向体现在 ,经济法追求的一般价值取向———实质正义和社会公正。经济法直接将维护社会经济总体效益作为自己追求的目标和遵循的原则 ,这是经济法价值取向的独到之处 ,以人性的全面实现和人的全面发展为最终价值目标。经济法的三大原则 ,简明地表达了经济法的价值取向。