期刊文献+

财产权对人格权的积极索取与主动避让 被引量:11

The Positive Claim and Active Avoidance of Property Rights as to Personality Rights
原文传递
导出
摘要 财产权与人格权的关系历来是充满争议和左右徘徊的问题。传统理论认为人格权是内在于人且具有绝对的不可侵犯性,在与财产权冲突时优先。但并非所有人格要素都是内在于人,物质性人格权,尤其是身体权和生命权具有绝对优先性,财产权面临生命和身体冲突须主动作出自我牺牲性避让,甚至是以作为方式提供救助,而一些非物质性人格利益并不具有内在性和绝对不可侵性,财产权则可以对其实施积极索取,但在一定临界点,也必须立即停止积极索取行为,只是这种避让无须作出自我牺牲,无须作为。 The relation between property rights and personality rights has long been controversial and misleading. In traditional theory personality rights are deemed inherent rights of persons and absolutely inviolable, and priority shall be given to, if conflicts exist between them, personality rights over property rights. However, not all elements of personality are inherent rights of persons, personality rights of material nature, especially rights to human body and rights to life have an absolute priority, and even there are no rights conflicts between them. Property rights must avoid them actively when it is in the presence of rights to life and rights to human body. Nevertheless, other personality rights of non-material nature are not inherent or absolutely inviolable. Claims regarding property rights may be positively made on them. Whereas positive claims must be ceased when reaching a critical point and such avoidance needs no self-sacrifice.
作者 石春玲
机构地区 上海政法学院
出处 《河北法学》 CSSCI 北大核心 2010年第9期129-135,共7页 Hebei Law Science
关键词 人格权 财产权 积极索取 主动避让 personality rights property rights positive claim active avoidance
  • 相关文献

参考文献23

  • 1[日]松冈义正.京师法律学堂笔记.民法总则[M].1911.127-128.
  • 2R. G. Hammond. Personal Property[ M]. Revised Edition, New York: Oxford University Press, 1922.82.
  • 3黄琳.姓名权和肖像权的异化[A].中美法学前沿对话[C].北京:中国法制出版社,2006.288,325.
  • 4王传丽.私生活的权利与法律保护[A].民商法纵论—江平教授七十华诞祝贺文集[C].北京:法律出版社,2000.
  • 5戴剑波.权利正义论[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2007.118,92,85.
  • 6理查德·A·波斯纳.正义/司法的经济学[M].苏力译,北京:中国政法大学出版社,2002.
  • 7理查德·A·波斯纳.蒋兆康译.法律的经济分析·上[M].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1997.77.
  • 8[法]路易·若斯兰.权利相对论[M].王伯琦,译.北京:中国法制出版社,2006.
  • 9[日]星野英一.私法中的人[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2004.
  • 10P Samuelson. Privacy as intellectual property[J]. 52 Stanford law review May 2000.1129.

共引文献80

同被引文献170

引证文献11

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部