《环球法律评论》2011年第4期中英文提要

内容提要：

美国宪法实施以后，法人的宪法地位问题很快就提到了联邦最高法院。进入二十世纪以后，美国法人的宪法权利进一步扩展，法人又拥有了免于双重危险、陪审团审判、政治言论自由等一系列权利。在美国之外，法人的宪法权利也有不同程度的发展。德国在宪法文本中直接规定了法人的宪法权利，日本宪法文本虽无关于法人的明文规定，但在理论和实践中法人都享有一定的宪法权利。法人的宪法权利一直伴随着争议，尤其是法人的政治言论自由更是引发了热烈的争论。赋予法人宪法权利体现了宪法适用的价值，是法人对抗法律侵权的手段，客观上促进了经济发展，但是法人对政治活动的参与也可能引发金钱政治的危险。

［Abstract］

In the United States, corporate struggle for constitutional rights has gone through a long process and even today, cases involving the expansion of corporate constitutional rights still catch the public's eyes. In countries such as Germany and Japan, we can also see development of theories and practices in relation to corporate constitutional rights. Fighting for constitutional rights by corporations is a way to avoid legal infringement and granting corporations constitutional rights truly embodies the practicality of the constitution in the process of social development.

企业商标权与言论自由的界限

--以美国商标法上的戏仿为视角

李雨峰

内容提要：

商标的历史非常久远，但把商标作为财产保护却迟至19世纪。美国宪法中的"知识产权条款"不是商标法的立法基础。但在美国，公民、法人享有的商标权和言论自由都有其宪法基础。在商业领域，商标戏仿指的是把他人的商标作为批评、调侃对象的行为。戏仿在商标权与言论自由之间制造了一种紧张关系。一方面，商标所有人希望借助现代商标制度防止他人对自己标志的擅自使用；另一方面，第三人又希望借助言论自由的保护，对他人的商标进行最大程度的利用。如何解决商标权与言论自由之间的冲突，构成了司法实践中的难题。商标不同于传统财产、应受一定程度的限制这一属性并不能为戏仿提供言论自由的保护。在实践中，美国法院探索了"可替代的其他充分的传播手段"、"非商业性言论"等进路来解决商标权与言论自由的冲突。"可替代的其他充分的传播手段"标准无法解决戏仿的对象是商标本身而引起的问题，"非商业性言论"标准面临的困扰是无法划分商业性/非商业性言论之间的界限，为此，美国的立法和司法实践引入了"合理使用"标准。

［Abstract］

Compared with protection of properties, trademark was given the protection as late as the 19th century, though it had a long history. The intelleectual property clause contained in the US Constitution has not established a legislative basis for trademark law. In Ameirca, however, both freedom of speech and trademark right enjoyed by citizens and legal persons are based on the constitutional mandate. In business field, trademark parody refers to criticism and ridicules of others'trademarks, thus creating a tension between trademark right and freedom of speech. On one hand, a trademark owner wants to prevent others from using his/her own trademark without authorization with the help of modern trademak system; on the other hand, a third party hopes to make use of others'trademarks to the maximum under the protection of freedom of speech. How to solve the conflict between trademark right and freedom of speech poses a throny problem in judicial practice. The fact that trademark is different from real estate and the attribute that it should be limited to some extent can not provide parody with protection of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. In practice, three approaches, namely, sufficient alternative communication means, noncommercial speech and fair use, have been explored by court to solve the conflict between trademark right and freedom of speech. However, the test of sufficient alternative communication means can not resolve the problem that the target of parody is trademark itself. The test of noncommercial speech is facing the difficulty of defining the line between commercial and noncommercial speeches. As a result, the test of fair use has been introduced in judicial practice in the US.

美国企业法人的言论自由权与竞选资金规制

吕芳

内容提要：

竞选资金规制是20世纪70年代以来美国言论自由诉讼的三个焦点问题之一。2010年的"联合公民案"提出了公司法人的言论自由权问题，其核心在于：竞选资金是否是言论？公司法人是否是言论自由权的主体？本文分析议会与最高法院在公司法人的竞选资金规制问题上的分歧，对"联合公民案"中的法律争议进行评析，并在此基础上探析公司法人言论自由权法律争议的深层次原因。

［Abstract］

Campaign finance regulation is one of the three key issues arising in lawsuits involving freedom of speech in the United States since 1970s of the 20th century. Following the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission in 2010, the right to freedom of speech enjoyed by corporations has been debated extensively. Is political expenditure given in election a form of protected speech under the First Amendment? And can corporations and unions be treated as individuals granted freedom of speech? Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission will influence political campaign and policy environment greatly. This article observes the history of campaign spending of corporations and unions, analyzes legal disputes over campaign finance regulation between the Supreme Court and the Congress in relation to "Citizens United", and explores deepseated socioeconomic causes leading to legal disputes over campaign finance regulation in the United States.

冲突的积极功能的边界

--兼谈法学的自主性

朱桐辉

内容提要：

社会学对冲突的积极功能的肯定是建立在冲突解决过程及解决效果上的，是整体性的观察，但并不适用于法的视野。从法的立场出发，需要对冲突作出否定评价并予以排解。法学关乎人的主观意图的特质决定了计量化、科学化的努力在其领域内的进展较为艰难。这也说明法学具有自主性，尤其在人们对规范法学与法解释学仍有巨大需求的趋势下，其自主与自足性并未受到冲击。既然法学不可能过多地从人文学科获得知识资源，也不属于严格的社会科学，那么法学就是法学，属于科学的第四极。

［Abstract］

As a general observation and based on the process and result of disputes solving, sociology confirms the positive function of disputes. However, this confirmation is not applicable to legal research. From the perspective of jurisprudence, we need to negate and exclude disputes. The very characteristic of focus on man's subjective intent by jurisprudence determines the difficulty of the use of metrological and scientific analysis within its realm. This shows that jurisprudence is autonomous. Furthermore, its autonomy has not been influenced when there is still great demand for both normative jurisprudence and science of legal interpretation. Since jurisprudence can neither draw much enlightenment from humanities, nor belong to social science in the narrow sense, it's just itself, jurisprudence, the fourth pillar of science.

解析阿列克西宪法权利适用的比例原则

钱福臣

内容提要：

阿列克西的宪法权利适用和解释理论是一种原则理论。这种理论将宪法权利规范看作是原则，也即要求某事在给定的法律和实际的可能性中在最大程度上被实现的规范。但在具体的宪法权利案件中会出现原则之间互相对抗的情况，因此就需要对欲确定适用的原则进行选择和权衡，而宪法权利适用的比例原则就是一个较好的解决方案。该原则理论和比例原则所具有的高度创见性在引起强烈反响的同时，也遭受了西方学术界的广泛批评，其中最基本和最重要的反对意见认为比例权衡是非理性的。在回应这些批评时，阿列克西提出，可以将比例权衡看作是商谈的理性结构，并据此证明比例权衡是理性的，故而可以实现商谈结果的理性的最大化。

［Abstract］

Being a kind of theory of principles, Alexy's theory of application and interpretation of constitutional rights regards the norm of constitutional rights as the principle, namely, the norm requiring that something be realized to the greatest extent within the given legal and factual possibilities. In cases involving constitutional rights, however, principles may conflict with each other. Choice and balance, therefore, are needed in relation to the principle that shall be applied. In this regard, the principle of proportionality can be used as a relatively better way to deal with the competing principles. Though the creativity of the theory of principles and the principle of proportionality has attracted much attention, it has also been criticized by western academic community widely. The most fundamental and important criticism has pointed out the irrationality of the balance of proportionality. In responding to these criticisms, Alexy explains that one may regard the balance of proportionality as a rational structure of discourse and by relying on this understanding, Alexy is able to expound and prove the rationality of the balance of proportionality. The rationality of the result of discourse may be realized to the maximum accordingly.

试析英国的封建制度及其宪政之生成

李栋

内容提要：

中世纪欧洲普遍存在的封建制度对不同国家的政治法律道路走向起到了不同的作用。诺曼征服后，英国王权的适度强大以及在此基础上形成的王权与教、俗贵族集团之间特殊的力量对比结构，不仅成功地使其抑制了封建制度内在"离心力"的潜在危害，而且很好地汲取了封建制度"双向性契约关系"的宪政主义因素，成功走上发展宪政之路。相反，欧陆各国由于适度中央权力的缺失，封建制度中"双向性的契约关系"非但不能促进宪政要素的生长，反而加剧、放大了封建制度内在"离心力"的危害，从而成为阻碍宪政文明进步的一种消极性力量。英国宪政成长的事实告诉我们，适度的权力在一国法治、宪政生成过程中具有重要意义。

［Abstract］

As a universally established system in Europe in Middle Ages, feudal system had influenced trends of political and legal developments in different countries differently. After the Norman Conquest, the moderate strengthening of the royalty and special balance of powers among the royalty, church and nobility formed on the basis of the increasingly strengthened royalty had not only successfully restrained the potential danger of inherent "centrifugal force" existed in feudal system, but had also drawn smartly on the elements of constitutionalism contained in the "twoway contractual relationships" of feudal system. The shaping of constitutionalism thus came true. On the contrary, in European countries, due to the lack of proper central authority, the "twoway contractual relationships" practiced in feudal system, instead of fostering the growth of elements of constitutionalism, had actually sharpened and increased the danger of "centrifugal force" existed in feudal system. As a result, it became a negative force obstructing the progress of civilization of constitutionalism. The growth of constitutionalism in England reveals that proper power obtained plays a vital role in the process of materializing rule of law and constructing constitutionalism in a country.

医事刑法基本问题研究

曹菲

内容提要：

如果不对医事刑法研究的共通原理进行挖掘，医事刑法学作为一门"学问"就永远无法得到确立。医疗行为的正当化根据应当依照区分治疗行为和非治疗的医疗行为展开讨论。治疗行为的正当化根据，存在治疗行为伤害说、治疗行为非伤害说和中间说。治疗行为伤害说具有妥当性。治疗行为的正当化根据在于患者优越利益的实现，非治疗的医疗行为的正当化根据在于危险承受。患者的自我决定权是重要的，但不是万能的，只能在相对的自律中尽可能地尊重患者的自我决定。应当从实施主体、医疗家长式作风、医疗正当程序三个方面对患者的自我决定权进行制约。小组医疗中过失竞合时责任主体的限定，不仅要考虑因果关系的相当性，更应重视各个过失行为的正犯性等归责因素。小组医疗中也有适用信赖原则的余地。小组医疗中信赖原则的适用以分工的确立为前提条件，以存在实质的信赖关系为根本条件。

［Abstract］

Medical criminal law can never establish itself as a branch of "learning" unless efforts are made to explore the common principles in medical criminal law studies. The justification of medical treatment is determined by the distinction between treatment and noncuring medical care. For the justification of medical treatment, there exist theories of injury and of noninjury by medical treatments, and theory of compromise. With regard to theory of injury caused by medical treatment, it carries appropriateness. The justification of medical treatment lies in the realization of the maximum interests of the patient while the justification of noncuring medical care can be determined by riskbearing. Though the right to selfdetermination of patient is important, yet it is by no means omnipotence. Only with relative selfdiscipline, may we try our best to respect patent's selfdetermination. Nevertheless, it should also be restricted from the following three aspects: implementation subject, medical paternalism and medical due process. In setting a limit on person/subject liable for negligence concurrence in team medical treatment, consideration should not only be given to the correspondence of causal relations, but also to elements of liability fixation such as principal offender of negligent conduct. The principle of trust may also be applicable in team medication, taking division of work as its prerequisite and substantive trust relationship as its essential requirement.

试析控制重新犯罪的重返社会范式

翟中东

内容提要：

"重返社会"是指帮助服刑人员适应社会生活、融入社会而防止其重新犯罪的主张与实践。重返社会范式兴起于上世纪60年代，它的产生与犯罪外因论有一定的关系,直接原因则是由于监狱内服刑人员互相濡染、监狱服刑成本高、强化犯罪人格等弊端越来越明显，同时，人们还认识到，重新犯罪的原因，除犯罪人内在的"恶"之外，还有其家庭以及社会等方面的原因。要防治重新犯罪，除对服刑人员进行行为和心理矫治之外，还需要帮助解决服刑人员家庭、接受教育、就业等问题，促进服刑人员顺利融入社会。重返社会范式的实践形式包括监狱行刑中的重返社会措施与社区服刑中的重返社会措施两种类型。重返社会范式的发展历史虽然不长，但是，在防止重新犯罪实践中，它的重要价值已经为越来越多的人们所认识。

［Abstract］

More and more attention has been paid to the need to help criminals enter back into society, as malpractices occurred in prisons are increasingly exposed, such as acts of humiliating criminals'personality, forced adaptation to jaillife and huge costs of maintaining prisons. Such a tendency reflects the realization that backintosociety model is more rational and more workable in reality and contains a clear aim in preventing recidivism within the concept of backintosociety. Study shows the effort made to help criminals enter back into society can effectively reduce recidivism rate and has become an important preventive measure in this respect.

德美证据排除规则之放射效力研究

刘磊

内容提要：

从美国法中的"毒树之果"规则的演进以及"沃沦法院"时期的宪法判例看，是否排除"毒果"要视"毒树"与"毒果"之间的因果关系而定。德国的证据禁止规则包括证据取得之禁止与证据使用之禁止，证据取得之禁止与证据使用之禁止都可以产生放射效力，其"假设的侦查"理论与美国判例观点相似。我国引入"毒树之果"规则具有一定的可行性，可以从刑讯逼供来寻找改革的突破点，赋予法院排除"毒果"的权力，我国法院应当运用平衡理论来审查衍生证据与违法证据间的因果关系。

［Abstract］

The rule of "fruit of poisonous tree" stems from the constitutional case decided during the period of Warren court. Whether the "fruit" will be excluded depends on the causality between the "poisonous tree" and the "fruit". The prohibitive rule applied in Germany includes prohibition of evidence illegally obtained and prohibition of use of tainted evidence. Both of them can produce ripple effect and the theory of "hypothetical investigation" in Germany is similar to the standpoint of "inevitable discovery" upheld in constitutional cases in the US. Introducing the rule of "fruit of poisonous tree" into China can be conducive to our legal reform to eliminate the practice of extorting a confession by torture. By entrusting court with the power to exclude the tainted "fruit", and through using balance theory, court will be in a position to examine the causality between derivative evidence and illegal evidence.

慈善信托法律制度运行机理及其在我国发展的障碍

王建军 燕翀 张时飞

内容提要：

慈善信托作为结集慈善资源的重要途径和方式，历经百年，理应得到长足发展，然而现实中，其在全球的发展并不理想，与制度设计初衷反差较大。慈善信托作为从英美国家借鉴引进的法律制度，基于两大法系国家和地区不同的文化传统与不同的福利体制，其植入中国社会面临着诸多障碍。慈善信托制度的根基在于信用，如果信用不被视为社会基本行为准则，那么该项制度则很难发展起来，这就是慈善信托制度现阶段无法在中国植根、发展以及进一步以法律形式确定的根本原因。从具体实践层面上看，慈善信托制度与我国现行法律规范存在一定张力，无论是在设定主体上、信托财产属性上、设立程序上，还是慈善信托监察人制度以及税收优惠政策的驱动力上，诸多方面都存在不足与滞后。目前，我国正在起草《慈善事业法》，鉴于慈善信托制度缺乏在我国建立与发展的原初动力与条件，因此现阶段不宜在《慈善事业法》中规定该项制度。

［Abstract］

As an important way and means of collecting charity resources, charitable trust ought to have scored considerable achievements in a hundred years. In reality, however, its development is not desirable globally and a big gap still remains between the original design of the system and the practice. When charitable trust is implanted into Chinese society, being a legal system introduced form AngloAmerican countries, and based on different cultural traditions and welfare setups in countries and regions of both common law system and continental law system, it inevitably faces many obstacles. The foundation of the system of charitable trust is credibility. If credibility is not regarded as the basic social norm, then it is impossible for the system to get any development. This is the very reason that the system of charitable trust cannot take root, develop and be legally established in China at present stage. Looking at the practical level, there is a tension between the system of charitable trust and the current laws in China. Deficiencies and laggingbehind are common, whether in terms of the establishment of the subject, the attribute of trust estate, and procedural setup, or with regard to the supervision mechanism of charitable trust and the impetus of preferential policy of tax revenue. At present, the drafting of law on charitable undertakings is well under way. Since neither the initial motive force nor necessary conditions are available in the shaping of the system of charitable trust in China, it is not proper and ripe to provide this system in the law on charitable undertakings at this stage.

英国行政法上合法预期的起源与发展

余凌云

内容提要：

合法预期在英国发展的总体脉络是由程序性保护发端，向实体性保护走去，赔偿性保护却简约不占主流。它经由一个个判例逐步发展而来。从某种意义上讲，其发展的基础是实用主义而非理论原则。但是，经过法院的持续努力，理论上已蔚为大观，面相也逐渐清晰起来，并形成自洽的体系。英国的合法预期远播海外，然而澳大利亚、新西兰、加拿大等国家在继受中也因本土观念的影响而发生了流变。英国的合法预期与德国的信赖保护、美国的禁止反言有着近似的功效，也有着实质差别。

［Abstract］

The general trend of development of legitimate expectation in UK started with the procedural protection, and develops recently towards the substantive protection, while compensatory protection exists but is by no means the mainstream. Actually, legitimate expectation grows up gradually by individual cases. Pragmatism, instead of theoretical principles, serves as the very basis of its development. With constant efforts made by the court, the theory of legitimate expectation has been constructed and taken a form of independent system. As the theory of legitimate expectation in UK spreading overseas, it has evolved in the process of continuation and development in Australia, New Zealand and Canada to satisfy their respective traditions and native legal doctrines. If we compare legitimate expectation in UK with protection of trust in German law and estoppel in US law, we will find that on one hand, they have similar functions; on the other hand, they are distinct from each other substantially.

中世纪古典教会法论析

苏彦新

内容提要：

中世纪古典教会法是整个教会法发展史的最为重要的阶段，代表着教会法的最高成就，并且对西方法律传统的生成至关重要。而在此时期，古典教会法所获得的型塑式样与成熟，特别是教会法学都与格拉蒂安密切相关。在中世纪欧洲，罗马法与教会法关系密切但也有区别，两法作为中世纪共同法的最为基本的因素对西方法律传统及西欧近代法律的生成具有重要的作用。本文阐释了古典教会法的突出特征及其在实际中的适用，梳理了教会法相关内容与观念对当时及尔后欧洲社会的某些制度与观念形成所发挥的作用及相关评价。

［Abstract］

The shaping of the classical canon law in Middle Ages is regarded as the most important stage in terms of the history of the general development of canon law. This very stage of development also represents the greatest achievement of canon law and plays a vital role for the growth of Western legal tradition. During this period in Europe, the development of a fullfledged classical canon law was closely related to Gratian, when Roman law and canon law had close links but also distinguished from each other. Both laws, being the most basic elements of the common law in Middle Ages, are significant to the development of Western legal tradition and modern law of Western Europe. This article first elaborates the distinctive characteristics of the classical canon law and its application in reality, and then discusses the impact of relevant contents and ideas embraced in canon law on the construction of certain systems and ideologies in European society then and thereafter. In a final note, the article describes fully comments on the spirit of the classical canon law made by R.H.Helmholz, American famous scholar and expert of religions and canon law.

美国涉外侵权冲突法的最新发展

--俄勒冈州《侵权与其他非合同请求的法律选择法》评介

王晓媛

内容提要：

俄勒冈《侵权与其他非合同请求的法律选择法》是美国第一部由普通法传统的州颁布的成文侵权冲突法，代表了美国侵权冲突法的最新成就。这部法律在实证分析的基础上准确定位自身特点，将冲突法的立法和研究工作引向纵深发展；在比较法基础上构建最适合自己的规则体系，体现出平衡、独立和理性的特点。与此同时，该法放弃灵活方法，采取规则形式，基于预防损害和填补损害的实体功能在侵权冲突法上的不同要求，确立了行为规制规则和损失分摊规则的分割原则，并通过侵权行为地法原则、意思自治原则、共同住所地法原则以及"最适当"原则的设置，将实质正义因素融入对冲突正义的追求中，力求实现法的确定性与灵活性的最佳平衡。

［Abstract］

The Act on Choice of Law for Torts and Other NonContractual Claims, the first attempt to codify tort conflicts by the State of Oregon with common law tradition, represents the latest achievement in tort conflicts in America. On the basis of empirical analysis, the Act has offered a clear delineation of its own characteristics, thus enabling the legislation and research of conflict of laws to gain momentum. On the basis of comparative law, the Act has constructed its own body of rules highlighting the values of balance, independence and rationality. Moreover, by abandoning openended approach and instead, taking the form of choiceoflaw rules, the Act has established the principle of division between the conductregulating rule and lossdistributing rule, which is supported by the substantive law of torts and its two fundamental objectives--deterrence and compensation. Through the establishment of the rules of lex loci delicti, party autonomy, the law of the common domicile, and the "most appropriate" principle, the Act has also incorporated the substantive justice into its search for conflicts justice, and tried to restore a proper equilibrium between the certainty and flexibility of the law.