本文選題：司法裁判 + 利益衡量��； 參考：《河北大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著改革開放的不斷深入，我國的社會(huì)利益格局也發(fā)生了深刻的變化，，如何調(diào)整利益的分配格局、協(xié)調(diào)利益間沖突、平衡利益關(guān)系，這已經(jīng)成為司法裁判過程中面臨的重要課題。 利益衡量理論正成為我國學(xué)界普遍認(rèn)可的能夠解決這一難題的良方。利益衡量理論是在批判概念法學(xué)的基礎(chǔ)上產(chǎn)生的，由利益法學(xué)派提出、經(jīng)美國社會(huì)學(xué)法學(xué)的發(fā)展、日本的民法解釋學(xué)將利益衡量理論發(fā)展到頂峰�，F(xiàn)在，利益衡量已經(jīng)成為普遍認(rèn)可的法律方法。但經(jīng)過充分發(fā)展的利益衡量理論在被引進(jìn)至我國后面臨著新的考驗(yàn)，利益衡量在司法裁判中的涵義以及定位問題在一定程度上限制了利益衡量作為法律方法在我國司法實(shí)踐中的發(fā)揮，因而，首先要對(duì)利益衡量的中國內(nèi)涵及定位進(jìn)行明確。 在司法實(shí)踐中，利益衡量是指法官在司法裁判的過程中，對(duì)法律所確認(rèn)的相互沖突的利益，進(jìn)行權(quán)衡與取舍最終選擇出需要保護(hù)的更重要的利益，并尋求相應(yīng)的法律依據(jù)將結(jié)論予以正當(dāng)化、合法化的活動(dòng)。法官的裁判思維實(shí)質(zhì)上就是利益思維，并且利益衡量可以稱得上是司法裁判的實(shí)質(zhì)方法。利益衡量貫穿司法裁判過程的始終，從查明案件、認(rèn)定證據(jù)到得出結(jié)論和適用法律都離不開利益衡量。 利益衡量在本質(zhì)上講是一種主觀行為，更依賴于法官的主觀能動(dòng)性，因而具有自身固有的局限性和不足，如何通過可行的手段克制法官能動(dòng)的“超范圍”發(fā)揮，保證法律的穩(wěn)定性和裁判結(jié)果的妥當(dāng)性能夠達(dá)到平衡，是利益衡量理論在司法裁判實(shí)踐應(yīng)用中面臨的最大難題。本文在理論與實(shí)踐的基礎(chǔ)之上，探討司法裁判中利益衡量的關(guān)鍵性問題并尋求規(guī)制利益衡量的對(duì)策。 利益衡量的規(guī)制不是獨(dú)立的一個(gè)問題，產(chǎn)生“恣意”或“濫用”的原因也不是僅僅因?yàn)槔婧饬繎?yīng)用本身。利益衡量所處的裁判環(huán)境在更大意義上影響著利益衡量，因此本文所持的利益衡量規(guī)制觀點(diǎn)是：利益衡量的規(guī)制本質(zhì)上是要求完善利益衡量的應(yīng)用，利益衡量應(yīng)用的方法、原則等也正是利益衡量規(guī)制的原則和方法。另外提升法官的素質(zhì)也是利益衡量規(guī)制的重要方面。 本文分為三部分，著重討論我國司法裁判中利益衡量的基本問題及其規(guī)制方案。第一部分梳理介紹利益衡量的基本概念和理論發(fā)展歷程。第二部分是利益衡量在司法裁判中的基礎(chǔ)理論，包括界定、定位及必要性問題，為后面的規(guī)制內(nèi)容做理論鋪墊。第三部分是本文的重點(diǎn)，分析了利益衡量在司法裁判中規(guī)制的緣由及進(jìn)行規(guī)制的原則和方法。
[Abstract]:With the deepening of reform and opening up, profound changes have taken place in the pattern of social interests in our country. How to adjust the distribution pattern of interests, coordinate the conflicts between interests and balance the relationship of interests has become an important subject in the process of judicial refereeing.
The theory of interest measurement is a good way to solve this problem. The theory of interest measurement is produced on the basis of critical concept jurisprudence. It is put forward by the school of interest law. After the development of American sociology of law, the theory of Civil Law Hermeneutics in Japan has developed the theory of balance of interest. It is a widely accepted legal method. But after being introduced into our country, the theory of fully developed interest measurement is faced with a new test. The meaning and positioning of the interest measurement in the judicial referee, to a certain extent, restricts the interest measurement as a legal method in our judicial practice. Therefore, the first should be to the balance of interests. The content and orientation of the volume of China are clearly defined.
In judicial practice, the measure of interest refers to the judge's judgment in the process of judicature, which is to justify and legitimize the legal basis, and the judge's thinking is in essence. Beneficial thinking and interest measurement can be regarded as the substantive method of judicial refereeing. Interest measurement runs through the process of judicial refereeing. It can not be separated from the determination of the case, the evidence to the conclusion and the applicable law.
The measure of interest is essentially a subjective act, more dependent on the subjective initiative of the judge, and therefore has its own inherent limitations and shortcomings. How to control the "super scope" of the judge through a feasible means to ensure that the stability of the law and the appropriate results of the referee can reach the balance, and the theory of interest measurement in the division. On the basis of theory and practice, this paper discusses the key problems of the interest measurement in the judicial referee and seeks the measures to regulate the measure of interest.
The regulation of interest measurement is not an independent problem. The cause of "unscrupulous" or "abuse" is not only because of the interest measurement application itself. The referee's environment in which the interests measure affects the interest measurement in a greater sense. Therefore, the view of the regulation of interest measurement is that the essence of the regulation of interest measurement is in essence. It is also the principle and method of interest measurement regulation to improve the application of interest measurement, the method and principle of interest measurement, and also to improve the quality of the judge as well as the important aspects of the regulation of interest measurement.
This article is divided into three parts, focusing on the basic problems of interest measurement in the judicial referee and its regulation scheme in our country. The first part combs the basic concept of interest measurement and the development course of the theory. The second part is the basic theory of the interest measurement in the judicial referee, including the definition, positioning and necessity, and the following regulation content. The third part is the focus of this article. It analyzes the reasons for the regulation of interest measurement in judicial adjudication and the principles and methods of regulation.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D926

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 沈仲衡;西方法哲學(xué)利益觀述評(píng)——兼論利益在法學(xué)理論研究中的意義[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2003年05期

2 趙可;;淺談利益衡量的若干基礎(chǔ)問題[J];湖北社會(huì)科學(xué);2009年02期

3 陳金釗;;法官司法的克制主義姿態(tài)及其范圍[J];法律方法;2008年00期

4 劉霞;;法官素質(zhì)：內(nèi)涵及提升[J];法律適用;2008年07期

5 胡玉鴻;利益衡量與“社會(huì)需求”——訴訟過程的動(dòng)態(tài)分析之一[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2001年03期

6 梁上上;利益的層次結(jié)構(gòu)與利益衡量的展開——兼評(píng)加藤一郎的利益衡量論[J];法學(xué)研究;2002年01期

7 劉權(quán)政;王永利;;當(dāng)代中國社會(huì)利益沖突分析[J];西北農(nóng)林科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年01期

8 陳金釗;司法過程中的法律方法論[J];法制與社會(huì)發(fā)展;2002年04期

9 張利春;;關(guān)于利益衡量的兩種知識(shí)——兼行比較德國、日本的民法解釋學(xué)[J];法制與社會(huì)發(fā)展;2006年05期

10 趙冉初;;論法律適用中的利益衡量[J];吉林省經(jīng)濟(jì)管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年03期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 張利春;日本民法中的利益衡量論研究[D];山東大學(xué);2008年

2 鄭金虎;司法過程中的利益衡量研究[D];山東大學(xué);2010年

本文編號(hào)：2028331