Human Rights Implications of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China

Putting the people first in human rights protection is the most distinctive feature of the outlook on human rights in contemporary China. The codification of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China reflects the people’s legislation for themselves, which is guided by the principle of putting the people first in its external system and internal values. Functionally, the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China reflects the obligation of the country to protect human rights, constructs the framework relationship between the country and individual people, and perfects the mechanism for human rights protection. The continuous expansion of the types, contents, and functions of civil rights in the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China is required by the broad scope of human rights, with an aim to realize a happy life for the people, the most important human rights, and protect people’s personal rights, property rights, and right to dignity through specific rules. The universal sharing of human rights requires the universality of the subjects of civil rights. The equal sharing of human rights requires the equality of forms of civil rights protection. Meanwhile, it further requires the substantive equality of civil rights protection. Attention is paid to protecting the rights and interests of specific groups in external and embedded ways.

Realization of the Right to Economic Assistance of Women with Disabilities in Divorce from the Perspective of the Civil Code

Protecting the equal human rights of persons with disabilities is an important part of human rights protection in China.The Marriage law Amendment in 2001 focused on the economic assistance system for divorce relief for a party unable maintain the local basic standard of living.The Civil Code has adjusted and expanded the system,stipulating that one party can ask for financial help from the other party if the party can’t maintain a reasonable living after divorce.To a certain extent,this economic assistance should include the assistance to the party whose living standard has decreased significantly after divorce and the party who has made more sacrifices and contribution to the marriage during the marriage.Although the economic assistance system for divorce stipulated in the Civil Code does not specifically address unequal treatment or discrimination against women with disabilities,since women with disabilities are more vulnerable after divorce,they are more likely to put forward economic assistance claims after a divorce,be more dependent on others physically and psychologically,and find it more difficult to obtain employment.Social security for women with disabilities is still insufficient and compared with other subjects,women with disabilities are likely to be in an unequal position in the realization of their right to economic assistance in divorce.Therefore,it is necessary to put forward reasonable legal interpretations and application suggestions for the relevant provisions in the Civil Code,so as to fully realize the economic assistance rights of women with disabilities in divorce,and reflect the care and protection of the human rights of women with disabilities in the Civil Code.

Constitutional Analysis of the Personality Theory of Civil Law

The word"personality"has various connotations,which essentially reflect people’s thoughts on personality in different periods.The transformation of personality in a civil aspect to the personality on the constitution aspect has negative effect on the personality system of the civil,which is of great value to develop the civil personality rights system in order to facilitate the connection between the civil law,the constitution and the public law.The capacity for rights not only separates the relative independent personality rights of civil law from the personality system of Roman law,but also promotes the emergence of the constitutional personality rights and its return in the field of civil law.The nature and orientation of personality rights in civil law has an important influence on civil legislation.There are three ways to realize the constitutional rights of personality in our civil law:civil legislation,constitutional interpretation and general personality rights.

宪法上的Civil Rights是公民权利吗?——解读constitutional civil right

作为西方法律文化的产物 ,constitutionalcivilrights有其独特的自然法背景。本文通过对西方法律思想史、宪法史和美国最高法院司法实务见解的梳理与综合分析 ,认为将constitutionalcivilrights译为“公民权利”属于误读 ,它混淆了依据人的属性和依据公民资格而获得的权利之间的道德区别。应将其译为“私人权利” ,明确这一权利体系的前国家与超国家特征 ,使其区别于实证法律传统之下个人依赖作为政治社会成员资格所享有的公民权利 ,并区分宪法权利与民事权利之间的差异。在法官的解释下 ,constitutionalcivilrights还呈现出开放特性 ,是一个能够感应时代变化的、发展的权利体系。

Justification of and Response to the Specificity of Workers’Personality Rights

The pervasive existence of subordination in the work-place endows workers’personality rights with a distinct specificity that differs from other civil subjects.The specificity of workers’per-sonality rights is primarily manifested in three aspects:the exercise of rights is restricted by the employer;personality rights infringements often accompany violations of workers’economic property rights;and the scope of rights is not limited to the duration of employment.To respond to the specificity arising in the labor domain,certain disputes concerning workers’personality rights should be handled through la-bor dispute resolution procedures.In individual cases,judicial author-ities should differentiate among protection levels based on the specific type of personality rights involved,with a focus on examining the rea-sons,methods,and extent of the employer’s restrictive actions,thereby establishing a practical and reasonable review system.。

The Sumame of Turkish Women： A Question of Identity？

After the foundation of Turkish Republic in1923, Turkish Civil Code which was codificated from Switzerland in 1926 was a new code for modem Turkey that aimed gender equality. Even if, there were some articles, contrary to the equality of men and women, they were ignored when they were compared with the reforms performed in favor of women. The surname of woman was one of the issues where there was gender discrimination. In the Civil Code of 1926, it was stated that the married woman must have taken her husband＇s surname after the official marriage and she had to use it through her marriage life. In 1997, there was an amendment in TCC Article 153 that the married woman had the right to register her maiden name in front of her husband＇s surname which was also accepted in the new TCC in Article 187 in 2002. As the equality of the spouses is neglected under Article 187, many women are trying to change the current situation, by lawsuits. In this article, the regulations about the surname, will be discussed under personality rights and identity, within the current legislation with some court decisions from the last years in favor of women.

A Coherent Interpretation of Economic Compensation for Divorce:Taking Gender Equality as the Basis

Article 1088 of China's Civil Code grants the right to seek economic compensation in divorce cases.However,significant confusion persists regarding the values,interpretations of doctrine,and legal techniques related to this compensation.Various viewpoints have emerged on the nature of compensation,including notions of household wages,human capital investment,moral obligation,and damages recovery.Concerning compensation standards,there are proposals such as the“humanitarian assistance”theory,“household wages”theory,“expected interest”theory,or“loss of interest”theory.By examining the evolution,legal principles,and practical applications of economic compensation for divorce from a human rights perspective,we aim to establish the legal foundation for this compensation,grounded in principles of gender equality.It clarifies that the compensation essentially confirms and restores individual development opportunities and the right to development in the context of gender inequality.This approach aims to provide a more coherent interpretation of clauses of economic compensation for divorce in terms of legal purposes,legal doctrines,and legal techniques,thus offering a more reasonable perspective to reconcile theoretical and practical discrepancies in economic compensation for divorce.

On the“News Exception”in Personal Information Protection

Protection of personal information is a significant issue in the construction of legal systems in various countries in the information age.Introducing a balanced approach for protecting personal information is an important goal of basic human rights protection and data legislation.Personal information protection involves comprehensive considerations among various values,and the balanced structure between personal information rights and other rights systems has become the key to legislation on personal information protection.The“news exception”is a prominent example representing the balanced structure of personal information protection.As a societal instrument,news not only pursues commercial value but also advocates freedom of expression and public value.There exists a natural tension between news and personal information protection.The“news exception”of the balanced structure has become a fundamental requirement and important connotation for constructing a system for protecting personal information.The balanced structure of the“news exception”requires a reasonable definition of the concept and purpose of news,and both the self-discipline within the news industry and the judicial intervention are necessary factors.China has preliminarily completed the top-level legislative design of personal information protection through laws such as the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China(PRC)and the Personal Information Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China.However,the balanced mechanism of the“news exception”has not yet been fully established in China.A“news exception”based on the ideas of balance and the improvement of the institutional system is the fundamental principle for the development of China’s personal information protection system.

New Challenges Posed by Robots to China's Civil Code in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

the age of artificial intelligence(AI),robots have profoundly impacted our life and work,and have challenged our civil legal system.In the course of Al development,robots need to be designed to protect our personal privacy,data privacy,intellectual property rights,and tort liability identification and determination.In addition,China needs an updated Civil Code in line with the growth of AIl.All measures should aim to address AI challenges and also to provide the needed institutional space for the development of AI and other emerging technologies.

《民法典》背景下个人信息保护的司法考察与制度完善

大数据时代,为充分保障个人的信息安全,我国相继施行的《民法典》《个人信息保护法》对此作出了较为全面的规定。考察相关规则的司法适用,发现我国个人信息保护存在个人信息与隐私权界定不清、损害赔偿威慑作用不足、公益诉讼制度效用未充分发挥、“知情—同意”标准不一且流于形式等问题。为解决上述问题,可通过构建可识别的场景化模式界定个人信息,引入情境脉络完整性理论判定隐私,审慎引入惩罚性赔偿,明晰个人信息保护公益诉讼的适用条件,构建“国家—行业—平台”三层规则体系实现实质同意,全面保护个人信息。

论个人信息保护民事公益诉讼起诉主体的范围与顺位

自个人信息保护民事公益诉讼在我国开展以来,理论界与实务界就对该类诉讼的起诉主体存在较大争议,分歧主要集中在范围界定与诉权顺位两个方面。《个人信息保护法》第70条虽然对该类诉讼的起诉主体作了规定,但主体范围不明以及诉权顺位不清的问题仍未得到彻底解决。要正确实施该制度,应否定“履行个人信息保护职责的部门”的起诉资格,扩张“法律规定的消费者组织”的范围,明确“由国家网信部门确定的组织”的条件,并以《民事诉讼法》第58条及不同类型民事公益诉讼之间的关系为依据,厘清不同起诉主体的诉权顺位。当受侵害对象为普通公民时,应尊重检察机关民事公益诉权的补充性,将“国家网信部门确定的组织”的起诉顺位置于检察机关之前;当受侵害对象为众多消费者时,应考虑到受侵害对象的特殊身份,依次由“法律规定的消费者组织”“由网信部门确定的组织”和检察机关行使起诉权。

民法典中生态环境损害赔偿责任体例疏释

《中华人民共和国民法典》第1234条、第1235条将生态环境损害赔偿责任拆分成“两类六种”责任形态并列规定,这一制度体例承袭民事责任以责任后果的形态分别列举的体例。从历史面向看,这一体例既受移植苏联在总则中规定民事责任的影响,也与计划经济时期公法责任冲击民法的历史过程相关。然而,民法典编纂过程中并未对这一体例予以矫正,反而将其应用到生态环境损害责任的立法中。从现实面向看,尽管这一体例的形成具有一定的偶然性,但随着对民法典的本土化研究,这一体例所体现的“权利-义务-责任”体系被赋予了取代“权利-请求权”体系的新功能,并且使生态环境损害赔偿规避了环境权的争论得以直接以责任的形式规定。但由于其遮蔽了责任后果与责任原因之间的关联,使分别列举的责任后果的适用逻辑不清晰,致使生态环境损害赔偿责任司法实务中存在赔偿不足或赔偿冗赘的现象。在当前制度环境下,欲在保持现有的生态环境损害赔偿责任体例的前提下理顺生态环境损害赔偿责任的适用逻辑,需在学理层面将其与责任原因相连结。

《民法典》第1014条(姓名权、名称权不得非法侵害)评注

《民法典》第1014条规定的姓名权、名称权不得非法侵害,是姓名权、名称权的消极防御权能,其与《民法典》第1012条、第1013条规定的姓名权、名称权的积极权能,共同构成现行法律体系下关于姓名权、名称权权能的一般规定。对于涉及姓名权、名称权消极权能的法律纠纷,在其他法律如《著作权法》《商标法》《反不正当竞争法》等没有具体规定时,应回溯到本条作为规范依据。本条在立法技术上采具体列举+概括规定的方式,既明确了应予禁止的典型侵害行为,也将那些尚不足以预先概括其事实构成的侵害行为纳入现行法调整范围,从而使制定法能够跟得上社会发展而为姓名权、名称权提供充分保护。主张本条规定的典型侵害行为及其他侵害行为的权利人负有证明责任,需要证明行为人实施了干涉、盗用和假冒等行为,若权利人不能证明或提供的证据前后矛盾等,则要承担不利后果。

民事在线诉讼当事人权益保障的检视与路径探索

当事人权益保障体现了以当事人为中心的诉讼理念,确保了实现诉讼效益与程序公正的统一。在线诉讼中单一的程序选择权类型难以满足双方当事人需求、证人远程作证提高了质证难度、异步审理稀释了直接言词原则、个人信息保护与庭审公开之间存在张力。应当根据被选择事项性质合理确定选择权类型、加强证人远程作证技术保障、肯定异步审理的价值并明确边界、具体衡量审判公开与个人信息保护价值利益。

《民法典》动产与权利担保制度的商法属性解释论

《民法典》第388条对功能主义担保立法模式的引入,使动产和权利统一担保体系具有了较为鲜明的商法属性。但囿于民商合一的立法体例,其商事元素大多隐藏在民事规范之下,不得彰显。现行担保体系对商事担保的特殊性及商事交易实践需求不能及时作出回应,对商事交易实践造成影响。故而民商合一的立法体例需通过法律适用在实质上实现一般化一体规制,特殊化区分规制的立场。对此,商法视角的引入极为必要。商事担保以效益优先为价值理念,以功能主义为底层逻辑,在制度设计上具有更多的商事元素。利用区分原则,对担保体系中的民商事担保规范进行区分、整合,以形成担保体系“形式民商合一,实质统分结合”的体例。同时,商法思维的适用应兼顾商事规范的个性及民事规范的稳定,从而对动产和权利统一担保体系的商法属性作出回应,以期促进商事金融的发展创新。

数据知识产权质押融资完善对策研究

数据是一种新兴的生产要素和重要的创新资产,我国为激发其创新活力制定了一系列的政策和措施。作为一种创新的融资方式,数据知识产权质押融资以企业合法拥有并在数据知识产权登记系统或存证平台获得证书的数据作为质押物,对于释放数据要素的内在价值具有积极作用。2008年以来,中央及各地方政府陆续颁布知识产权融资相关法律法规、政策,鼓励民事主体参与知识产权质押融资活动,掀起知识产权质押融资实践热潮,丰富的实践样态为研究该制度提供了实证基础。通过梳理现有法律制度并结合实践样态,旨在厘清数据知识产权质押融资发展过程中存在的问题,进而提出相应的解决对策。

论侵害监护权的损害赔偿责任

相对于监护关系外的第三人,监护关系具有绝对、排他的效力,监护人依法履行监护职责产生的权利属于绝对权,受到侵权法的保护。非法使被监护人脱离监护的行为构成对监护人监护权的侵害,侵权人应当承担由此造成的财产和精神损害。监护权被侵害的财产损害既包括监护人为恢复监护关系而支出的合理费用,也包括因此遭受的误工损失等其他财产损失。侵害监护权的行为只有使父母子女关系和其他近亲属关系遭受严重损害时,父母以及担任监护人的其他近亲属才享有精神损害赔偿请求权。被监护人在脱离监护期间死亡时,作为监护人的近亲属既享有因监护权被侵害的损害赔偿请求权,也有权就被监护人的死亡向侵权人行使人身损害赔偿请求权;被监护人伤残的,只有被监护人享有人身损害赔偿请求权。赔偿合理的奔丧费既符合民法典的规定,更是我国传统伦理道德与社会主义核心价值观的基本要求。

论房屋强制执行中案外居住权人的保护

《民法典》新增的居住权制度旨在保障弱势群体的居住权利,但对于强制执行中居住权的处置缺少规定。判断案外人是否享有居住权,不仅应从形式标准判断其居住权是否设立,还应从房屋的使用状况、居住权的设立时间以及是否支付对价等方面对其真实性予以实质审查。根据物权的优先效力与顺位规则,案外人的居住权优先于执行申请人的债权与后设立的抵押权。居住权根据功能不同可分为人役性居住权和非人役性居住权。其中,人役性居住权以保障特定主体的基本生存居住为目的,其实现需要房屋所有人的配合,若案外人能够证明强制执行将妨害其人役性居住权实现,则可排除强制执行。在居住权不能排除强制执行时,设有居住权的房屋以“带居拍卖”为原则,仅在居住权影响在先抵押权实现时可“除居拍卖”。在“除居拍卖”时,居住权人有权要求相应补偿,或者可以向债权人代为履行并取得对房屋所有人的债权。无论采用何种拍卖方式,居住权人均应享有优先购买权。

法人实施有效民事法律行为的界限研究

当前我国民法体系中对法人实施民事法律行为的效力边界未有明确规定,这主要是法人的民事权利能力和民事行为能力范围不清晰导致的。从我国民法体系法人制度的历史演变轨迹来看,国家对法人民事权利能力和民事行为能力规范的界限已发生了较大变化。通过解释目前相关法律条文的文义以及类推适用这种“法律漏洞”补充方式,可以看出:法人的民事权利能力不受其经营范围、业务范围或章程规定、设立目的宗旨或任务规定的限制,与自然人相同,其有资格在所有民事法律行为中享有民事权利和承担民事义务;但这并不意味着其拥有以自己的行为去取得所有民事活动中的民事权利、履行民事义务的民事行为能力。除了在前述规定范围内实施的符合法律规定的民事法律行为有效外,在前述规定范围外实施的民事法律行为要根据法人的不同类型及其是否获得政府许可或法律授权等因素来确定该民事法律行为的效力。

登记对抗主义下相对性物权说之批判

登记对抗主义物权变动规则由设立要件与对抗要件构成,其适用难点在于如何解释对抗要件所产生的登记对抗效力。相对性物权说在承认未登记物权仍为物权属性可对抗一般债权的前提下,主张未登记物权不能对抗特殊债权乃对抗要件发挥其登记对抗效力的必然结果,进而认为,在登记对抗主义下,依据合同设立的未登记物权具有相对性。然而,该学说偏离了物权界定规则与登记对抗规则的位阶关系,对域外法的借鉴未能作出契合本土的诠释,导致设立要件与对抗要件的功能错位。实质上,相对性物权说是以物权的相对性替换债权物权化。特殊债权优先受偿与登记对抗效力不存在必然联系,因而不应纳入登记对抗效力的调整范围。