论指导性案例之文本剪辑——尤以指导案例1号为例

发布时间：2018-06-03 20:36

本文选题：案例指导制度 + 文本剪辑　；参考：《法制与社会发展》2013年02期

【摘要】：剪辑文本力求简约,是判例库为法律人共同体正确利用的必要前提;为了体现判例制度相对于成文法的优点,又必须为法律发现者提供完整的初始文本,以上是判例制度的固有矛盾,两大法系经典的判例制度对此采取了相同的化解方案:将简约工作交给法学研究,将最后的文本权威保留给判决原文。我国指导性案例文本是行政力量遴选剪辑的结果,与中华法系固有的"条例"、"判例"一脉相承,均为经典判例制度所不容,但从案例指导制度到中国特色判例制度是一个可以实现的系统演化历程。现阶段指导性案例文本剪辑有其正当性,但是在剪辑的限度、文本垄断、剪辑前后文本的关系上应作深入反思。
[Abstract]:In order to reflect the merits of the precedent system over the statutory law, it is necessary to provide a complete initial text for the legal discoverer. The above is the inherent contradiction of the precedent system. The classical precedent system of the two legal systems has adopted the same solution to this problem: to give the simplified work to the legal study and to retain the authority of the final text to the original text of the judgment. The guiding case text of our country is the result of the selection and editing of the administrative power, which is in line with the "regulations" and "precedents", which are inherent in the Chinese legal system, and are not acceptable to the classical case law system. But from case-guiding system to case-setting system with Chinese characteristics is a system evolution course that can be realized. At present, the instructive case text editing has its legitimacy, but in the limit of editing, the monopoly of text, the relationship between the text before and after editing should be deeply reflected.
【作者单位】：清华大学法学院;
【基金】：国家社科基金重点项目“中国民事指导性案例理论研究”(12AZD122) 教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目(12YJC820095) 中国博士后科学基金面上资助项目(2012M520227)
【分类号】：D926.2

【参考文献】