本文選題：美國 + 文化財產(chǎn)返還��； 參考：《學術(shù)交流》2016年09期

【摘要】：美國的訴訟時效制度在傳統(tǒng)上因循英格蘭法的規(guī)定,其中關(guān)于文化財產(chǎn)返還之訴的時效制度主要發(fā)展出的理論有"要求并被拒絕規(guī)則"與"發(fā)現(xiàn)規(guī)則"。同時,在兩規(guī)則發(fā)展中出現(xiàn)的"勤勉盡責"、"遲誤抗辯"以及"實質(zhì)發(fā)現(xiàn)"等在經(jīng)過判例的確認后也都成為美國文化財產(chǎn)返還訴訟中現(xiàn)行時效制度的組成部分。其于司法實踐中通過不斷地自我矯正而演進并趨于完善的制度設(shè)計,綜合了有關(guān)公序良俗、文化歸源、國家利益與當事人權(quán)利維護等多方面的公私利益平衡,體現(xiàn)了現(xiàn)代司法的價值平衡理念。這樣的制度設(shè)定對國際文化財產(chǎn)的保護和流失文化財產(chǎn)返還意義深遠。
[Abstract]:The statute of limitations system in the United States has traditionally followed the provisions of English law, in which the prescription system for the return of cultural property mainly develops theories such as "requirement and rejected rule" and "discovery rule". At the same time, "diligence due diligence", "delay error defense" and "substantial discovery", which appeared in the development of the two rules, have also become part of the current statute of limitations system in American cultural property return litigation after the confirmation of the case law. In the judicial practice, the system design, which evolves and tends to be perfect through the self-correction, synthesizes the balance of public order and good custom, cultural return, national interest and the protection of the rights of the parties, and so on. It embodies the idea of value balance of modern justice. The establishment of such a system is of great significance to the protection of international cultural property and the return of lost cultural property.
【作者單位】： 吉林大學國家司法文明協(xié)同創(chuàng)新中心;法學院;理論法學研究中心;
【基金】：教育部重點研究基地重大項目“民生政治時代的人權(quán)保障研究”(14JJD820006) 吉林大學重大課題培育項目“中國特色國際法治理論體系研究”(2015ZDPY07)
【分類號】：D997.1
，

本文編號：2004225