본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

论民事法官能动性的确立及程序理性

Discussion on the Establishment of Civil Judicial Activism and Process Rationality

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

随着社会经济发展和新型、疑难复杂案件的不断攀升,民事法官在法律规定模糊、冲突、缺位以及适用法律导致个案显失公平等情形下,运用其合理解释、平衡、选择法律适用和填补法律缺漏的能动性,解纷止争已成为时代之需. 由于立法的局限性、共识性规则的阙如,以及法官群体职业思维的同质化程度不高,法官能动性的运作呈现一种“自发”的、不确定状态,导致诸如迟延裁判、错误裁判甚至矛盾裁判等一系列问题. 为此,需要正视法官能动性的两面性,对其进行合理的尊重与规制:更新裁判理念、推动立法跟进和关注司法国情,让法官能动性在立法与司法之间灵动起来;需要建立规则、规范程序,让法官能动性在指导性案例的程序保障中发挥出来;需要规则之治的校正、平等正义的增强、便民机制的完善和定纷止争的实现,让法官能动性在规则治理和正当程序中平和化解纠纷;需要程序设计符合诉讼目的、程序适用符合规则逻辑,以及纠纷解决和规则之治的平衡,让法官能动性在纠纷解决和程序运作中得到尊重,以回应社会现实的客观需要.

Abstract

With the development of social economy and new difficult cases gradually rising, it is the need of era that civil judges has discretion in construing, coordinating and selecting laws and can even fill the legal gap to resolve disputes on the circumstances of legal appears conflict, fuzzy, vacancy and unfair. Because of the limitation of legislation, absence of consensual rules and the low homogenization of professional thinking of judges, the operation of judicial activism takes on a “spontaneous” and uncertain look and that leads to a series of problems such as deferred judgement, erroneous judgment and even contradictive judgment. Therefore, it is necessary to envisage the two sides of judicial activism and give it a reasonable respect and regulation: updating the principle of judgment, pushing the legislation and focusing on the judicial situation, making the judicial activism alive between legislation and judicature; It is necessary to establish principles and standardize procedures, make the guiding cases to guarantee the procedures; It is necessary to adjust the rule of provisions, enhance the equality and justice, improve the convenient mechanism and realize the harmony, make the judicial activism can solve disputes pacifically through provisions and due procedure; It is necessary to make the design of procedure conform to the purpose of litigation, application of procedure conform to the balance of logic rules, dispute resolution and the rule of provision, and make the judicial activism get the respect in dispute resolution and procedure operation to response to the objective needs of social reality.

참고문헌 (19)

  1. 茨威格, "比较法总论" (2003), 法律出版社
  2. 考夫曼, "法律哲学" (2004), 法律出版社
  3. 伯恩, "法理学四" (2003), 法律出版社
  4. Hugh G.Gauch, Jr, "科学方法实践" (2005), 清华大学出版社
  5. 邱联恭, "法官之现代化与程序法" (1992), 台湾地区三民书局
  6. 崔林林, "严格规则与自由裁量之间-英美法官风格差异及其成因的比较研究" (2005), 北京大学出版社
  7. 梁修迎, "法官自由裁量权" (2005), 中国法制出版社
  8. 黄文艺, "全球结构与法律发展" (2006), 法律出版社
  9. 徐国栋, "民法基本原则解释-成文法局限性之克服" (1992), 中国政法大学出版社
  10. 吴兆祥, "提升法官水平的必由之路:确立统一的裁判思维模式", 人民司法, (3) (2011)
  11. 顾培东, "能动法官若干问题研究", 中国法学, (4) (2010)
  12. 王国龙, "论和谐社会建构中法官的克制主义立场", 法学论坛, (3) (2007)
  13. 庄毅, "论法官能动主义在中国的现实基础", 兰州学刊, (8) (2006)
  14. 孔祥俊, "论法律效果与社会效果的统一-一项基于法官政策的法理分析", 法律适用, (1) (2005)
  15. 姚亮, "社会结构视野下的社会风险探析", 学习与探索, (7) (2009)
  16. 郎贵梅, "中国案例指导制度的若干基本理论问题研究", 上海交通大学学报, (2) (2009)
  17. 李友根, "指导性案例为何没有约束力", 法制与社会发展, (4) (2010)
  18. 强世功, "法律共同体宣言", 中外法学, (3) (2001)
  19. Richard L. Marcus, "Slouching Toward Discretion", Notre Dame Law Review, 78 (2003)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (13건)