本文選題：判例　切入點(diǎn)：判例制度　出處：《蘭州大學(xué)》2009年碩士論文

【摘要】： 我國(guó)是以制定法為主要法律淵源的國(guó)家,制定法具有內(nèi)容完整、體系清晰、邏輯嚴(yán)密、結(jié)構(gòu)科學(xué)等優(yōu)點(diǎn),但也有其不可避免的缺陷,表現(xiàn)在:其創(chuàng)制、修改或廢除都要經(jīng)過(guò)提出法案、審議法案、表決法案、公布法案等復(fù)雜嚴(yán)格冗長(zhǎng)的程序,立法效率低下,具有滯后性并缺乏應(yīng)變性;其法律規(guī)則過(guò)于原則概括,只適用于一般情況,而不能適用于特殊的個(gè)別情況,對(duì)特別的社會(huì)關(guān)系調(diào)整缺乏針對(duì)性等等。為消除制定法的這一弊端,我國(guó)不少學(xué)者提出,應(yīng)該借鑒我國(guó)歷史上和外國(guó),尤其是英美法系國(guó)家判例制度的經(jīng)驗(yàn),構(gòu)建具有中國(guó)特色的判例制度,把它作為成文法的有效補(bǔ)充,以判例制度的優(yōu)點(diǎn),消除成文法的僵化、滯后性弊端,彌補(bǔ)其不足。 鑒于此,本文從判例制度的一般理論入手,針對(duì)我國(guó)司法實(shí)踐和司法改革中存在的問(wèn)題,分析論證了我國(guó)進(jìn)行法制創(chuàng)新、推行判例法制度的可行性、必要性及其理論意義和現(xiàn)實(shí)價(jià)值,并結(jié)合我國(guó)目前的司法體制,提出了在我國(guó)推行判例制度的具體途徑和方法,即在堅(jiān)持制定法為主判例法為輔的前提下,最終建立起由各地人民法院遴選并逐級(jí)報(bào)送初選的“指導(dǎo)案例”,各上級(jí)人民法院在對(duì)所報(bào)送“指導(dǎo)案例”進(jìn)行逐級(jí)嚴(yán)格審核遴選后,最后報(bào)送最高人民法院,最高人民法院在對(duì)所報(bào)送“指導(dǎo)案例”再次進(jìn)行嚴(yán)格審核篩選后,在得到人大授權(quán)的前提下,對(duì)審核通過(guò)的“指導(dǎo)案例”以司法解釋的方式予以公布,使之具有“先例”地位,此后各級(jí)人民法院在相同或類似案件的審判中可直接依此“先例”進(jìn)行裁判。同時(shí),最高人民法院將每年度審核通過(guò)的這種“先例”性質(zhì)的“指導(dǎo)案例”進(jìn)行匯總整理,編制類似英美法系國(guó)家《判例匯編》的中國(guó)的“指導(dǎo)性案例匯編”,以方便各級(jí)人民法院調(diào)閱、審案和遵循。通過(guò)這種有機(jī)聯(lián)系的配套機(jī)制最終完成中國(guó)特色的判例制度的構(gòu)建。
[Abstract]:China is a country whose main legal source is the statutory law, which has the advantages of complete content, clear system, strict logic and scientific structure, but it also has its inevitable defects, which are manifested in its creation.Amendments or repeals are subject to complicated and lengthy procedures such as introducing bills, deliberating bills, voting bills, and promulgating bills. Legislation is inefficient, tardiness and lack of adaptability; its legal rules are too general in principle.It can only be applied to general situations, not to special individual cases, to the adjustment of special social relations and so on.In order to eliminate this malpractice of statutory law, many scholars in our country have proposed that we should draw lessons from the experience of our country's history and foreign countries, especially the common law system, and construct a case system with Chinese characteristics.Take it as the effective supplement of the statute law, eliminate the rigidity and lag malpractice of the statute law and make up for its deficiency with the merits of the precedent system.In view of this, this article starts with the general theory of case law system, aiming at the problems existing in judicial practice and judicial reform in our country, analyzes and proves the feasibility of carrying out legal innovation and case law system in our country.The necessity, its theoretical significance and practical value, and combined with the current judicial system of our country, put forward the specific ways and methods of carrying out the case law system in our country, that is, under the premise of insisting on making the law as the main case law as the supplement,Finally, the "guiding cases" selected by local people's courts and submitted to the primary elections are submitted to the Supreme people's Court after the people's courts at higher levels have conducted a strict examination and selection of the "guiding cases" submitted to them,After the Supreme people's Court has once again rigorously examined and screened the "guiding cases" submitted, and on the premise of being authorized by the people's Congress, the "guiding cases" approved by the Supreme people's Court shall be published by way of judicial interpretation, so that they have the status of "precedent".Since then, people's courts at all levels in the same or similar cases can be directly based on this "precedent" adjudication.At the same time, the Supreme people's Court has collected and sorted out the "guiding cases" of a "precedent" nature, which are approved by the Supreme people's Court of China every year, and compiled the "guiding case reports" of China similar to those of the Anglo-American legal system countries.In order to facilitate access at all levels of the people's court, trial and follow.Through this organic connection supporting mechanism, the final completion of the Chinese characteristics of the legal precedent system construction.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號(hào)】：D926.2;D920.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李志明;戴湘文;;論我國(guó)判例法制度構(gòu)建之障礙及其克服途徑[J];長(zhǎng)沙理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年03期

2 宋慶永;關(guān)于中國(guó)借鑒判例法的幾點(diǎn)思考[J];池州師專學(xué)報(bào);2003年02期

3 曹三明;中國(guó)判例法的傳統(tǒng)與建立中國(guó)特色的判例制度[J];法律適用(國(guó)家法官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2002年12期

4 周道鸞;中國(guó)案例制度的歷史發(fā)展[J];法律適用;2004年05期

5 申夫;;試論判例也應(yīng)當(dāng)成為我國(guó)的法律淵源[J];中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1987年02期

6 阮防,邵培樟,李唐;試論建立我國(guó)的判例法制度[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2005年04期

7 曹達(dá)全;;從判例制度走向判例法——對(duì)中國(guó)借鑒判例法的幾點(diǎn)看法[J];福建行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年02期

8 李紅玲;吳婷;;論我國(guó)判例制度的建構(gòu)[J];法制與社會(huì);2007年01期

9 金玉;;我國(guó)建立案例指導(dǎo)制度之必要性探討[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年03期

10 崔迪;;中國(guó)判例法之路[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年09期

，

本文編號(hào)：1728368