论指导性案例类推适用的方法及限制

On the Methods and Restrictions of the Analogical Reasoning Application of Guiding Cases

受原始裁判个案情节的影响,许多指导性案例的裁判要点规定得比较具体,因此,仅仅借由解释—演绎推理将导致指导性案例的适用范围大大受限。对该问题的解决,要求法官善于运用类推适用的方法。指导性案例的类推适用由两部分构成,即比较点的确定和目的论的运用。就比较点的确定而言,应当明确只有指导性案例裁判要点的构成要件可以作为比较点,而且为增强实践合理性,无须事先确定必要性的比较点。就目的论的运用而言,需要找到可以同时涵盖指导性案例裁判要点和后案的案件事实之目的,同时还需要克服反向推理引发的阻力。此外,囿于制定法的限制,在围绕某一问题对指导性案例进行类推适用时,应当注意是否已经有制定法对该问题作了明确的规定,以及类推适用的结果对制定法之文义是否存在偏离。

Influenced by the circumstances of the original judgment cases,the judgment points of many guiding cases are more specific.Therefore,the application scope of guiding cases will be greatly limited only by executing deductive reasoning based on interpretation.To solve this problem,judges are required to be good at using the method of analogical reasoning.The analogical reasoning application of guiding cases consists of two parts:the determination of the comparison point and the application of purpose theory.As for the determination of the comparison point,it should be clear that only the constituent elements of the guiding cases'judgment points can be used as the comparison point,and in order to enhance the practical rationality,it is not necessary to determine the necessary comparison point in advance.As for the application of purpose theory,it is necessary to find the purpose that can cover both the judgment points of guiding cases and the facts of subsequent cases.At the same time,it is also necessary to overcome the resistance caused by reverse reasoning.In addition,due to the limitations of the statutory law,when applying guiding cases by analogical reasoning around a certain problem,judges should pay attention to whether the statutory law has made clear provisions on the problem,and whether the result of the application of analogical reasoning deviates from the meaning of the statutory law.