中国与英美法律制度中法律拟制运用之比较研究

发布时间：2018-01-19 08:08

本文关键词： 法律拟制法律的稳定性法律的发展法律推定法律解释　出处：《中国政法大学》2011年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：法律拟制作为一种古老的法律现象,在古今中外的法律制度中都有它的身影。富勒教授曾经将法律拟制比作“法律的病理学...是用以修补法律体系大厦缝隙的笨拙的补丁”1。由此可见,法律拟制是与法律相伴生的,只要存在着法律规范与现实之间的裂缝,就有法律拟制存在的空间。国外法学界曾经对法律拟制有过激烈的探讨,分属历史法学派、实证法学派与自然法学派的代表人物均加入了这场讨论。但是,由于法律拟制在不同的时代、不同的法律体系的表现形式不尽相同,加之学者们对法律本质的认识各异,致使这些讨论从不同的角度出发,对法律拟制的概念各执一词,甚至是褒贬不一。尽管如此,学者们不同角度的精辟论述对法律拟制在理论上的深入挖掘,不仅能使我们以更宽阔的视角去领略法律拟制的真面目,而且还能从中窥见分属各流派的法学家以此为战场展现出的各自的法学理论观点。由于未能出现较前人更有建树的观点,国外关于法律拟制的讨论在二十世纪后期已然降温。然而,法律拟制作为与法律相伴生的现象,并未像理论探讨那样销声匿迹;恰恰相反,它仍普遍存在于各国现行的法律制度与实践之中。反观国内学界对法律拟制的研究,国内的法学理论界似乎并未感受到这场久远的“法律拟制之辩”曾经如火如荼的气息,有关法律拟制的译作与探讨相对较少,仅有少量以法律拟制为视角对部门法相关法律规则的反思,且多集中在刑法领域。这些部门法层面的分析仅是局限于自身的对法律拟制的“管窥”,缺乏理论的完整性与体系性,亟待法理学在理论层面上的回应。本文选取我国与英美法律制度中拟制运用的比较为视角,结合不同法律体系的具体法律制度对法律拟制这项立法技术作深入的剖析与解读。第一章,总结与比较有关法律拟制概念的不同观点,将法律拟制界定为立法者基于某种价值目的的考虑,不问事实上的真实性,有意将事实T1与既有法律规则中的事实条件T2做决断性的等同或者关联,从而使事实T1获得T2之法律后果的一种特殊的立法手段。第二章,以第一章中法律拟制的概念界定为指引,对我国现行法律制度中的拟制条款做全面与具体的制度分析与功能分析。第三章,从相关判例与法官的司法活动入手,以同样的制度与功能分析的思路,探寻法律拟制在英美法律制度中的表现形式与作用。第四章,通过比较法律拟制在我国与英美法律制度之中运用的共同与区别之处,一方面,挖掘法律拟制的核心助益所在,以期将其合理利用;另一方面,相互借鉴二者相互之间更为可取的操作方法,避免拟制的滥用。
[Abstract]:Legal fiction is an ancient legal phenomenon. In ancient and modern legal systems there is its shadow. Professor Fuller once compared the legal fiction to "the pathology of the law... Is a clumsy patch to repair the gaps in the building of the legal system." Legal fiction is accompanied by law, as long as there is a crack between legal norms and reality, there is room for legal fiction. They belong to the historical school of law, the representatives of both the positivist school and the natural law school have participated in the discussion. However, due to the legal fiction in different times, different legal systems have different forms of expression. In addition, scholars have different understanding of the nature of the law, so that these discussions from different perspectives, the concept of legal fiction is different, or even mixed. Scholars from different angles to explore the legal fiction in theory, not only can we use a broader perspective to understand the true face of legal fiction. And can also be seen from the different schools of jurists as the battlefield to show their respective legal theoretical views. Because of the failure to appear than the previous people more successful point of view. The discussion on legal fiction in foreign countries has cooled down in the late 20th century. However, the phenomenon of legal fiction as a companion to law has not disappeared as much as the theoretical discussion. On the contrary, it still exists in the current legal system and practice of various countries. The domestic legal theorists do not seem to feel the long history of "legal fiction debate" has been in full swing, the translation and discussion of legal fiction is relatively rare. Only a small amount of reflection on the relevant legal rules of branch law from the perspective of legal fiction, and mostly concentrated in the criminal law field. The analysis of these branches of law is limited to their own legal fictitious "peek". The lack of theoretical integrity and systemativeness requires the theoretical response of jurisprudence. This paper chooses the comparison of fictitious application between China and the Anglo-American legal system as the angle of view. Combined with the specific legal system of different legal systems, the legislative technology of legal fiction is deeply analyzed and interpreted. The first chapter summarizes and compares different views on the concept of fictitious legal system. Legal fiction is defined as the consideration of legislators based on a certain value purpose, regardless of the fact of authenticity, the fact T1 and the existing legal rules of the fact conditions T2 to make a decisive equality or correlation. The second chapter is guided by the definition of the concept of legal fiction in the first chapter. This paper makes a comprehensive and specific institutional analysis and functional analysis of the fictitious clauses in the current legal system of our country. The third chapter starts with the relevant cases and the judicial activities of the judges with the same ideas of system and function analysis. Chapter 4th, through the comparison of the legal fiction in our country and the common and different use of the Anglo-American legal system, on the one hand. Excavating the core benefits of legal fiction in order to make rational use of it; On the other hand, learn from each other the more desirable operation between the two, to avoid the abuse of fiction.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D90

【引证文献】