立案登记制下执行要件之分担审查论

执行受理之允许性要件有两种类型:一类是可以直接形式化确认的要件,如诉讼能力、文书生效、当事人名称、有给付内容等;另一类是需经调查证明的兼具实体内容之要件,如继受执行之当事人适格、执行条件成就、对待给付或不确定期限届至。后者在程序规范上尚处于缺失状态,前者在特定条件下也会产生适用困难而需要解释。因此在立案登记制下,除需完善执行受理的要件体系外,还应当通过审查分担实现程序分流,将可以形式化确认的要件由立案庭进行立案审查,而在涉及解释和调查必要与可能的情形时提交执行裁决法官进一步审查,并适度充实后者的手段,以明晰并改进当前各审查阶段的关系。

不予执行制度的反思与规制路径重置

当事人申请不予执行制度指向两类执行依据,分别是公证债权文书和仲裁裁决。不予执行制度既是对两类执行依据的司法审查,也发挥了执行救济功能。但不予执行制度理性应受质疑。一方面,不予执行制度对公证债权文书是否成立、仲裁裁决是否有效的审查,与执行立案程序的审查内容一致,造成了二者的功能重叠。另一方面,不予执行事由指向的公证债权文书不成立、仲裁裁决无效情形,都属于执行依据不合法。由于执行依据无法表征基础权利存在,对其执行应当属于不当执行,而不予执行制度内置的却是对违法执行的救济逻辑。因此,不予执行制度应予废弃。取而代之的应是,在立案审查阶段廓清执行机关的审查范围,对执行依据应当前置审查、实质审查、一段审查,并充实执行立案程序的调查方法;在执行救济阶段则应回归对不当执行的救济逻辑,将执行裁决救济重置为诉讼救济。

剪力墙约束边缘构件阴影区尺寸取值的讨论

本文针对有翼墙和转角墙剪力墙约束边缘构件阴影区取值,以具体墙厚为例子,对照广东省标与国标的不同规定,得出不同的结果,阐明广东省标的规定更合理且节省钢筋量。主张工程设计时,有关剪力墙约束边缘构件阴影区尺寸取值应按广东省标的规定执行。

Emergency Law in China： Its Formation, Present State and Future

China＇s emergency laws have emerged as a result of dealing with crises. They comprise laws and regulations, emergency plans, and military regulations, and define three exceptional or emergency states： war, emergency and emergency response, with the aim of constructing a comprehensive integrated system based on the specialized division of labor. In practice, however, emergency plans take the place of laws and regulations and provide the fundamental normative basis for tackling emergencies, with government and the military playing the dominant role. Developing out of necessity and possessing temporary applicability, China＇s emergency laws are characterized by authorization and prevention. Integrating emergency law with the socialist legal system with Chinese characteristics, formulating basic law for emergency situations and improving the specific mechanisms of emergency law should be regarded as major steps in its future development.