On China’s Civil Law Codification and the Development of China’s Civil Law Scholarship

The development of the theoretical system of civil law scholarship and the codification of civil law are closely related and of promotional function to each other.The codification of civil law can promote the systematization of civil law scholarship,perfection of the value system,development and modernization of civil law studies,and the systematization of legal hermeneutics.The subjectivity of China’s civil law scholarship,i.e.,the notions of problem-orientation,nativeness,practice,the times and innovations,can be improved during China’s civil law codification.The codification of civil law can promote the development of a theoretical system of civil law scholarship with Chinese characteristics,including the development of diversified elements such as values,content,system,hermeneutics and methods of civil law.

The Notion of Efficiency in China’s Civil Law Scholarship

The pursuit of economic efficiency is the major driver for the birth of contemporary Chinese civil law.Contemporary civil law scholarship has demonstrated a serious concern for efficiency from the very beginning.However,many examples suggest that the notion of economic efficiency is often diluted or replaced by factors like civil law doctrinal scholasticism,moral notions,inertial thinking of the planned economy or the will of the leader.It has not been systematically attended to or expressed in a detailed and precise way in the contemporary civil law scholarship in China,rendering some economic judgments uneconomical.In the 21 st century,it is necessary for the civil law studies to establish a clearer and more precise notion of efficiency,to conduct more direct and accurate evaluations on civil laws’incentives on people’s behaviors and their socio-economic effects,so as to reduce the cost of social interactions and promote deeper cooperation and winwin outcome among individuals.

A SUMMARY OF THE CIVIL AVIATION LAW

Early in 1979,China beganconsidering the drawing up of alaw to govern and standardize theactivities of its civil air operations. At that time,air legislation wassomething nonexistent in China.Thedraft team assembled forces totranslate the air laws of various foreigncountries,including the United States,Britain,Japan and the former SovietUnion,and the relevant internationalconventions,and conducted a deep-going study of them.They also madeinspection tours of the United States,Canada,Britain and Germany.Onthe basis of the study of and withreference to the advanced legislativepractices in foreign countries,thedraft team put forward its first draft ofthe air law in July 1983,in accordancewith the actual conditions of thecountry.It was not,however,submitted to an executive meetingof the State Council for examinationand discussion because a series ofmajor problems such as air trafficcontrol and the control over theairworthiness of aircraft,had to befurther investigated and studied.

The Protection of the Right to Dignity in the Connection and Interaction between the Constitution and Civil Law

In the report of 19;National Congress of the Communist Party of China,General Secretary Xi Jinping said that China seeks to"accelerate development of the crime prevention and control system,combat and punish in accordance with law all illegal and criminal activities such as pornography,gambling,drug abuse,gang violence,kidnapping,and fraud,and protect people’s personal rights,property rights,and right

美国生物安全信息披露豁免制度研究——以“Civil Beat Law Center诉CDC案”为例

美国在以《自由信息法案》为核心的信息披露制度体系中,通过衔接《公共卫生安全和生物恐怖主义预防和应对法案》,将生物安全信息披露豁免纳入政府信息披露豁免规则之中。本文基于Civil Beat Law Center诉CDC信息披露豁免案来分析美国生物安全信息披露豁免所涉法律适用、解释原则、运行方式等,试洞见其相关披露制度运行的特点和所存在的问题,以期能有助于国内相关的研究。

民用航空法定义及其法律体系再审视

将民用航空法定义为调整民用航空活动所产生的社会关系的法律规范,这一定义应包含狭义与广义两个方面。狭义的民用航空法仅指以民用航空法或以相关航空专业命名的法律规范的总称;从广义而言,是指调整因民用航空活动所产生的社会关系的法律规范的总称,包括狭义的航空法定义以及航空活动所涉及的其他法律规范中调整民航法律关系的法律规范(规范的集合)。与之相对应的民用航空法律体系也应有狭义和广义之区别。广义民航法律体系,既包括传统的航空法律体系,也包括调整民航活动的其他主要法律规范。

构建现代中华法治文明新形态的契机与路径

中华法治文明是中华文明的重要组成部分,中华文明既是世界文明的源头之一,又是世界上唯一实现5000年连续发展未曾中断过的文明体。中华法系是世界公认的五大法系之一,是法治文明具有标识意义的重要概念。中华法系彰显了中华民族伟大的创造力和法制文明的深厚底蕴,要素化复兴是新时代中华法系复兴嬗变的方向,中华法系孕育了良法善治的多维图景。中国特色社会主义法治道路肇始于中华法系,中国特色社会主义法治体系是新时代的新中华法系。中国式现代化是植根于中华优秀传统文化的现代化,中华优秀传统文化对现代化具有强大韧性和适应性。改革开放要有新突破就必须进一步解放思想,“又一次思想解放”的关键是破除对西方式现代化的迷信,既不能用西方现代化的模式来套解中国式现代化,也不能用中国过去的经验来束缚今天的现代化实践,要努力去推动马克思主义中国化、时代化达到一个更新的境界。构建现代中华法治文明新形态的路径是:强化当代人复兴中华法系的文化使命与担当,建构新时代中国独立自主的法学知识体系,大力推进中国特色社会主义法治实践进程,为人类文明新形态建设提供有力的理论支撑。

我国农村生态文明法治建设面临的挑战与应对

农村生态文明法治建设的当代价值体现在有利于习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想的贯彻落实,有利于乡村振兴战略的全面推进,有利于共同富裕目标的扎实推进。在实践中,农村生态文明法治建设面临立法不健全、执法不严格、主体法治意识不足和监督体系不完善等现实挑战。我国应该通过健全农村生态文明法治立法、强化农村生态文明法治建设中的执法力度、增强农村生态文明法治建设相关主体的法治意识和完善农村生态文明法律监督体系等措施来推进农村生态文明法治建设。

个人信息保护公益诉讼制度建构路径优化——基于实体法与程序法交互方法

个人信息保护公益诉讼兼具实体法与程序法双重属性,基于实体法或程序法单一维度的制度建构将会陷入“一元观”困境。实体法与程序法交互为个人信息保护公益诉讼程序建构提供一种实体法关照。通过优化最具交互特征的三个支点:受案范围、责任形式和证明责任,不仅能够促进个人信息保护公益诉讼制度建构的二元论,也有利于推动实体法与程序法的一体化衔接,实现司法程序正义与实质正义。其一,从实体法维度,将“不特定多数人”公共利益说作为基础,增加“规模性”与“无差别性”的标准,解决受案范围“众多个人权益”的程序判断难题。其二,从程序法维度,通过诉讼信托的方式,允许原告受让惩罚性赔偿请求权,解决惩罚性赔偿这一责任形式缺乏实体适用空间难题。其三,从交互维度,一方面承认法官裁量分配证明责任,解决“规范说”在新型复杂案件的实体失范难题;另一方面设定证明责任减轻的请求权基础,解决裁判失度的程序适用难题。

Legal Systems and Economic Development:The Case of Aruba Post-Coronavirus

This paper intends to critically review some of the challenges rooted in Aruba’s civil law legal heritage in stimulating a post-corona economic recovery which should ideally be driven towards economic diversification.It also seeks to contextualize the effect of Aruba’s civil law system on economic growth compared to other Caribbean states with similar size,population,and tourism dependency but with legal systems rooted in the common law.This paper’s methodological approach is meta-analytical and includes a critique of the labor laws as well as the substantive role of the state in driving economic performance that is a normative feature in some civil law states.It posits that Aruba’s economic responsiveness,to the coronavirus should consider legal origins as a factor that limits its capacity and capability to execute an effective restructuring of tired economic paradigms and introduce new economic models that would challenge its mono-economic status.

试论中国民法学自主知识体系的构建

《民法典》的颁布为中国民法学知识体系的构建提供了依据和准绳,中国民法学自主知识体系应当体现本土性、借鉴性、原创性、时代性、科学性、实践性等特点。构建中国民法学自主知识体系应当以《民法典》的体系为基础,分别构建物权、合同、人格权、婚姻家庭、继承、侵权责任的制度体系。中国民法学自主知识体系的构建应当以民事权益为中心,以私法自治和人文关怀为价值。同时,民法学研究要面向高科技、大数据时代,面向市场经济,面向中国实际需要,从而构建中国民法学知识体系。

中国民法学自主性知识体系构建的方法论

中国民法学自主性知识体系是以中国民事司法实践为基础而建立的体系,具有鲜明的中国时代特色、实践特色。民法典的颁布,并不意味着建立自主性知识体系这一任务的完成。在传统民法强大的价值导向下,如果不遵循民法方法论的警醒与自觉,则会在既有的道路上越走越远。遗憾的是,现有民法方法论的司法论以及法教义学与社科法学的继受主义并没有实现这一转变。基于民法典的结构主义与转变的社会现实的需求,亟需构建功能主义释意模式。功能主义释意模式满足了民法典法教义学的需求,也实现了规范主义与现代化改革的融洽,理应成为建构中国民法自主性知识体系的方法论。只有实现中国民法方法论的自主,才能实现中国民法的自主。

司法组织改革措施之游移与锚定——以法院组织法与民诉法交叉内容为切入点

作为规范人民法院设置、组织和职权的基本法律,法院组织法规定了人民法院以何种组织形式开展(民事)审判活动以及审判组织在(民事)诉讼中的职责;作为调整民事诉讼法律关系的基本法律,民事诉讼法对人民法院从事民事审判活动的行为及职责作出规定。因此,两部法律在人民法院的规定上存在交叉内容。从理论角度分析,交叉内容应当是一致的。但由于分属不同法律部门,且发展亦不同步,因此,现阶段两部法律的交叉内容有相异之处。立法上的差异给人民法院进行民事审判及当事人参加诉讼造成了困扰。在锚定法院组织法与民事诉讼法关系的基础上,对交叉内容进行分析、厘清产生差异的原因、进而提出消弭差异的建议,以供立法完善时参考。

论在新征程上全面推进严格规范公正文明执法

行政执法是全面依法治国的重要抓手。严格规范公正文明执法理论,经历了“执法必严—严格执法—严格规范公正文明执法—全面严格规范公正文明执法”四阶演进过程,具有独特的时代价值。全面推进严格规范公正文明执法蕴含的核心要义,可以从“执法”“严格规范公正文明”“全面”几个核心概念入手进行系统阐析。在全面建设社会主义现代化国家新征程上,要深入贯彻落实党的二十大报告重要部署,在习近平法治思想的指引下,毫不动摇行政执法的政治导向,坚持以人民为中心的根本立场,不断深化行政执法体制改革,完善执法监督体系和机制,全面推进严格规范公正文明执法。

关于创新中国民法理论的若干问题

创新中国民法理论体系,应以中国特色社会主义基本经济制度筑牢民法财产关系之基,以社会主义核心价值观筑牢民法理论的社会主义本质之魂,以保护人格尊严、人身自由统领人身权法律关系,以民事责任构筑民事法律关系四要素体系,以中华优秀法律文化充实民事法律制度的历史,以民事权利统领私法体系,以实践方法论指引法学研究,以中国特色的司法解释制度不断补充完善中国民事法律。应进一步完善民事法律关系构成要素的理论,特别是将民事法律关系的客体与民事权利的客体相区别,法律关系的客体是发生民事法律关系所依据的具有确定性的事物,而权利的本质则是国家法律的强制力保障。应提升对法人本质的认识,法人的本质是脱离出资人能够独立存在的财产,这一财产决定法人的各项制度和法人的分类。

《民法典》背景下医学影像学科医疗法律风险管理研究

医学影像学科具有科技含量高、漏诊和误诊率高的特点,近年来成为医疗纠纷发生率高的医疗技术性科室。作者应用文献研究法,并提取某三甲医院2020年1月〜2022年6月医学影像学科医疗纠纷投诉案例进行分析,探讨现行《民法典》背景下,医学影像学科面临的法律风险,并提出相应的防范措施,从根源上积极防范医疗风险的发生。

动产功能主义担保的体系化构造

《民法典》引入功能主义担保理念是动产担保制度的重大变革。依照功能主义担保理念,只要交易实际发挥担保功能,就适用统一的动产担保规则。但在物债二分的财产法体系中,既保留了不同类型的法定动产担保物权,又引进了功能主义的担保理念,事实上造成了法律体系的不协调。基于中国的立法实际,动产功能主义担保的体系化应当在物权法的财产体系下展开。功能主义担保理念对传统物权法体系造成的影响,可通过缓和物权法定以及在其他财产担保方面准用动产担保的一般规则予以化解。

《民法典》构建的我国侵权责任法自主立法体系

自1949年以来,我国的侵权责任法已经有了3个版本,即《民法通则》规定的侵权责任(1.0版)、《侵权责任法》(2.0版)和《民法典》侵权责任编(3.0版)。30多年来,我国侵权责任法立足于本土,广泛借鉴域外立法经验,以大陆法系侵权法的一般化传统为体,以英美法系侵权法类型化经验为用,形成了具有中国气派和中国风格的侵权责任法。目前,《民法典》完成了我国侵权责任法自主立法体系的构建,具有鲜明的中国特色,成为卓有成效的民事权利保护法,能够充分保护民事主体的民事权利,制裁侵权行为,保障行为自由。

Creating a New Form of Rule of Law Civilization:A Historical Narrative of the Communist Party of China

The modernization path of the Chinese rule of law reflects the glorious process of the Communist Party of China(CPC)’s continuous exploration of the rule of law development.It has created a new form of rule of law civilization for humanity,one that has not only profoundly changed China but is also deeply influencing the world historical process.Under the leadership of the CPC,the Chinese people have achieved the innovation of legal mechanisms,text,and discourse in their century-long endeavor for the rule of law.This highlights the distinctive features of the Chinese rule of law civilization.The innovation of legal mechanisms is the foundation of the modernization of the Chinese rule of law,indicating that through the Party’s century-long endeavor for the rule of law,a legal leadership mechanism has been formed,in which the Party exercises overall leadership and coordinates the efforts of all sides;the innovation of legal text is the manifestation of modernization of the Chinese rule of law,indicating that through the Party’s century-long endeavor for the rule of law,the socialist legal system with Chinese characteristics is gradually moving toward a new stage of codification in which the promulgation and implementation of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China is a milestone;and the innovation of legal discourse is the core of modernization of the Chinese rule of law,indicating that through the Party’s century-long endeavor for the rule of law,the continuous refinement of the Chinese legal discourse system is playing a key role in providing theoretical support and legal reasoning.

“执破衔接”视域下参与分配制度的革新——兼评《民事强制执行法(草案)》第175条、179条

民事强制执行程序中的参与分配制度与破产程序在处置案件的范围上存在一定的交叉,二者之间应当存在良好的衔接配合关系。在我国破产法将可能采取一般破产主义的背景下,现行参与分配制度所具有的替代个人破产制度实现债权人之间公平受偿之功能应被剔除后,专注于解决金钱债权终局执行竞合问题,且在债权受偿顺位上须从平等主义原则转向优先主义原则。《民事强制执行法(草案)》第175条、179条虽在一定程度上实现了上述目标,但仍有不足。为此,建议在《民事强制执行法(草案)》第175条中增加一款规定即“非金钱债权申请人及保全申请人不得申请分配”,同时删除第179条第1款关于“共益债务”的规定及第1款第1项的规定。