【摘要】：對(duì)指導(dǎo)案例制度的研究,目前應(yīng)轉(zhuǎn)入對(duì)單個(gè)指導(dǎo)案例實(shí)際運(yùn)行情況進(jìn)行追蹤式的研究進(jìn)路。本文是該研究轉(zhuǎn)向的一個(gè)嘗試,以指導(dǎo)案例8號(hào)為分析樣本。對(duì)其引用情況的數(shù)據(jù)統(tǒng)計(jì)與分析表明,其引用狀況較為"低劣",遠(yuǎn)未實(shí)現(xiàn)最高院所預(yù)期的"指導(dǎo)功能"。以此為基礎(chǔ),本文對(duì)指導(dǎo)案例制度的功能予以反思,指出其限度所在,認(rèn)為在實(shí)現(xiàn)"同案同判"的宏旨上,一方面對(duì)其不應(yīng)抱持過(guò)高的預(yù)期,另一方面又有相當(dāng)?shù)目勺鳛榭臻g。
[Abstract]:At present, the research of guiding case system should be turned to the research approach of tracing the actual operation of a single guiding case. This paper is an attempt to guide case 8 as an analysis sample. The statistics and analysis of the citation data show that the quoting condition is inferior and far from realizing the "guiding function" expected by the Supreme Court. On the basis of this, this paper reflects on the function of guiding case system, points out its limitation, and holds that, on the one hand, it should not be expected too high, on the other hand, it can be regarded as space.
【作者單位】： 北京大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D922.291.91
，

本文編號(hào)：2274872