本文關(guān)鍵詞：民法解釋視野下能動(dòng)司法問題研究　出處：《湖南大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 民法解釋 能動(dòng)司法 司法克制

【摘要】：近年來，能動(dòng)司法已成為法學(xué)界的一個(gè)研究熱點(diǎn)。傳統(tǒng)的能動(dòng)司法是指司法權(quán)主動(dòng)積極地利用一切資源，運(yùn)用司法手段追求法律、政治、社會(huì)效果三者之間的統(tǒng)一，以回應(yīng)社會(huì)變遷和民眾需求的司法審判方式。從方法論上討論的能動(dòng)司法是指法官在審判案件過程中運(yùn)用法律解釋來對(duì)案件進(jìn)行裁判，以實(shí)現(xiàn)法律形式合法性和實(shí)質(zhì)合理性的統(tǒng)一。而目前對(duì)方法論意義上的能動(dòng)司法研究較少，因此研究能動(dòng)司法的適用確有必要，尤其是在民事案件中。通過對(duì)法官在司法實(shí)踐中的能動(dòng)司法典型案例進(jìn)行歸類與剖析，發(fā)現(xiàn)案例中法官運(yùn)用解釋推導(dǎo)結(jié)論的正向裁判思維過程只是虛飾的表象。實(shí)際上，法官裁判案件是依據(jù)結(jié)論決定解釋的逆向裁判思維。通過這些思維過程可知，在我國(guó)法官司法裁判過程并非是簡(jiǎn)單地運(yùn)用邏輯三段論，而是通過法律解釋的回溯推理，并根據(jù)法律后果的好壞來進(jìn)一步修正自己初步結(jié)論的過程。理性地看待這種意義上的能動(dòng)司法必須認(rèn)識(shí)到，一方面它會(huì)產(chǎn)生諸多正面效應(yīng)：彌補(bǔ)立法不足，化解基層的社會(huì)矛盾，做到提高司法效率與實(shí)現(xiàn)實(shí)質(zhì)公正并舉等；但另一方面也會(huì)帶來一些負(fù)面效應(yīng)：造成法官自由裁量權(quán)的膨脹和法院工作機(jī)制創(chuàng)新中的錯(cuò)誤等。當(dāng)前我國(guó)的能動(dòng)司法缺乏應(yīng)有規(guī)制，而法律方法恰好能從有效性和正當(dāng)性兩方面對(duì)司法活動(dòng)予以必要的控制，因此在民法解釋視野下能動(dòng)司法的正確適用應(yīng)當(dāng)堅(jiān)持方法上的克制與功能上的能動(dòng)相統(tǒng)一。通過堅(jiān)持正確的司法理念，恰當(dāng)?shù)剡x擇解釋方法，來規(guī)范法律解釋；運(yùn)用嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)倪壿嬐评砗驼?dāng)性的法律論證，，來強(qiáng)調(diào)法官說理；明確能動(dòng)司法的法律界限和職權(quán)界限，以規(guī)范法院管理制度。
[Abstract]:In recent years, active justice has become a research hotspot in the field of law. Traditional active justice refers to the active use of all resources by judicial power and the pursuit of law and politics by judicial means. The unity of three social effects. In order to respond to the changes of society and the needs of the public, the active justice discussed from the methodology refers to the judge using legal interpretation to judge the case in the course of trial. In order to realize the unity of legal form legitimacy and substantive rationality, however, there is little research on active judicial research in the methodological sense at present, so it is necessary to study the application of active justice. Especially in civil cases. Through the judge in the judicial practice of active judicial typical case classification and analysis. It is found that the positive thinking process of the judge using the interpretation to deduce the conclusion in the case is only a false appearance. In fact, the judge adjudication case is the reverse judgment thinking which decides the interpretation according to the conclusion. Through these thinking processes, we can know. In our country, the judicial judgment process of judges is not a simple use of logic syllogism, but through the retrospective reasoning of legal interpretation. And according to the quality of the legal consequences to further revise their preliminary conclusions. Rational view of this sense of active justice must recognize that on the one hand it will have a lot of positive effects: to make up for the lack of legislation. To resolve the social contradictions at the grass-roots level, to improve judicial efficiency and achieve substantive justice and so on; But on the other hand, it will bring some negative effects, such as the expansion of judges' discretion and the mistakes in the innovation of the working mechanism of the court, etc. At present, the active judicature in our country lacks due regulation. However, the legal method can control the judicial activities from the aspects of validity and legitimacy. Therefore, the correct application of active judicature in the field of interpretation of civil law should adhere to the unity of restraint in method and initiative in function. Using rigorous logical reasoning and legitimate legal argumentation to emphasize the reasoning of judges; Make clear the legal limit and authority limit of the active judicature, in order to standardize the court management system.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D926

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 楊知文;;司法裁決的后果主義論證[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2009年03期

2 戚淵;;論法律科學(xué)中的解釋與詮釋[J];法學(xué)家;2008年06期

3 陳金釗;;法治時(shí)代的法律位置——認(rèn)真看待法律邏輯與正義修辭[J];法學(xué);2011年02期

4 王建國(guó);;社會(huì)轉(zhuǎn)型過程中的司法能動(dòng)論[J];金陵法律評(píng)論;2007年02期

5 許國(guó)鵬;;能動(dòng)司法:必要性、問題與路徑選擇[J];理論探索;2011年04期

6 桑本謙,紀(jì)建文;司法中法律解釋的思維過程探析——就審判利格斯訴帕爾默案與德沃金的對(duì)話[J];法學(xué)論壇;2002年03期

7 秦前紅;周偉;;中美司法能動(dòng)主義比較研究[J];河南省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年01期

8 左衛(wèi)民;;十字路口的中國(guó)司法改革:反思與前瞻[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2008年06期

9 龍宗智;;關(guān)于“大調(diào)解”和“能動(dòng)司法”的思考[J];政法論壇;2010年04期

10 李水明;余向陽;卓茂華;;善待能動(dòng)司法——從法社會(huì)學(xué)和法經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)角度[J];政法學(xué)刊;2010年04期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 范春瑩;法律思維研究[D];山東大學(xué);2008年

本文編號(hào)：1417363