体系选法论:在规则与方法之间

Study on Choice of Law in Systematic Way: Between Rules and Methods

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属学者:

张春良

归属院系:

国际法学院

作者:

张春良

摘要:

选法结果对选法规则的逆袭造就了美国冲突法革命。后革命时代的冲突法除了将部分成果转变为养分对规则作了些许滋补外,最大的业绩就只剩下了统一。规则的改进可缓解、但无法根除冲突法危机,选法规则的内在缺陷命定了逆袭始终是一种可能。针对法律冲突问题,美国革命采取方法化解决的进路,在后革命时代则重拾规则化解决的进路。二者均将冲突法的危机等同为选法规则的危机,或激进或保守,难免沦为治乱循环之策。重审冲突法危机的本质,实为选法规则出离选法体系后的"裸选"。克服之道乃是让选法规则重归体系,恢复体系对规则的支持和制约,使法律冲突问题、体系化解决。体系替换规则,突破了规则的合理性极限,释放了冲突法方案的济世潜力。国际民商秩序的合理建构吁求供给侧改革,其要义是推进选法体系完善的同时,聚焦其关键"穴位",并予以点穴式回应。如此以点带面、点面结合地完善冲突法的供给,冲突法的自我修行才能不忘初心,方得始终。

语种:

中文

出版日期:

2019-09-15

学科:

国际法学

收录:

北大核心期刊; CSSCI; 中国科技核心期刊

提交日期

2019-10-12

引用参考

张春良. 体系选法论:在规则与方法之间[J]. 政法论坛,2019(05):81-94.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 体系选法论:在规则与方法之间
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 张春良
  • dc.contributor.author
  • Zhang Chunliang
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 西南政法大学;
  • dc.publisher
  • 政法论坛
  • dc.publisher
  • Tribune of Political Science and Law
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2019
  • dc.identifier.issue
  • 05
  • dc.identifier.volume
  • v.37;No.209
  • dc.identifier.page
  • 81-94
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2019-09-15
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • 冲突规则;冲突法革命;选法体系;体系选法
  • dc.subject
  • Conflict of Laws;Revolution of Conflict of Laws;Law Choice System;Systematic Choice of Law
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 选法结果对选法规则的逆袭造就了美国冲突法革命。后革命时代的冲突法除了将部分成果转变为养分对规则作了些许滋补外,最大的业绩就只剩下了统一。规则的改进可缓解、但无法根除冲突法危机,选法规则的内在缺陷命定了逆袭始终是一种可能。针对法律冲突问题,美国革命采取方法化解决的进路,在后革命时代则重拾规则化解决的进路。二者均将冲突法的危机等同为选法规则的危机,或激进或保守,难免沦为治乱循环之策。重审冲突法危机的本质,实为选法规则出离选法体系后的"裸选"。克服之道乃是让选法规则重归体系,恢复体系对规则的支持和制约,使法律冲突问题、体系化解决。体系替换规则,突破了规则的合理性极限,释放了冲突法方案的济世潜力。国际民商秩序的合理建构吁求供给侧改革,其要义是推进选法体系完善的同时,聚焦其关键"穴位",并予以点穴式回应。如此以点带面、点面结合地完善冲突法的供给,冲突法的自我修行才能不忘初心,方得始终。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • American Conflict of Laws Revolution is originated from the result against rule in choice of law. Besides the rules improvement based on some revolution achievements,the law unification is the most important success during post-revolution period. Improved rules may alleviate but can't eliminate the law choice crisis,because there are basic defects in the law choice rules. American Revolution adopts a new way to deal with the conflicts of laws,while the way return back to rules resolves these conflicts only on the basis of rules.Both ways regard the rules crisis as Conflict-of-Laws' one,and provide only temporary but not permanent solutions for the law conflicts. The essence of law choice crisis is actually the unconditional choice resulted from separation of law choice rules from law choice system. The crisis should be resolved by law choice rules which are supported and balanced by the system. The law choice system will overcome the limits of law choice rules,and release and greatly enhance their potentiality to answer the practice. The need to build up a reasonable transnational private order puts forward adjustments for supply side. Systematic choice of law is both a new and an adjustment which should take acupunctures on the key parts of the system while the system is in improvement. By this way,Conflict of Laws should make its aspiration come true,which is set from beginning and carried out during the whole progress.
  • dc.description.sponsorship
  • 2018年度国家法治与法学理论重点研究项目“论海牙‘判决项目’的最新发展——中国视角立场与方案”(185FB1009)的阶段性成果
  • dc.identifier.CN
  • 11-5608/D
  • dc.identifier.issn
  • 1000-0208
  • dc.identifier.if
  • 2.169
  • dc.subject.discipline
  • D997
回到顶部