法學期刊
論著名稱: 民刑分立之後-民初大理院民事審判法源問題再探 (Reexamining the Question of the Legal Source of the Civil Decisions of the Dali Yuan in the Early Republic of China (1912-1928))
編著譯者: 黃源盛
出版日期: 2007.08
刊登出處: 台灣/政大法學評論第 98 期 /1-59 頁
頁  數: 31 點閱次數: 964
下載點數: 124 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 黃源盛
關 鍵 詞: 民刑不分民刑分立大理院法源習慣判例法理
中文摘要: 傳統中國舊制的法典編纂體例,究竟是「民刑不分」?抑或「民刑有分」?還是「不分之中又有分」?是個相當富爭議性的課題。本文首先談及晚清中國法制如何從「民刑混沌」衍化到「民刑分立」;接著,側重在論述民國初年(1912-1928)的大理院,於當時民刑分立體制仍屬新建以及民事法典尚未齊備等條件下,如何進一步透過對於《大清現行刑律》等相關民事規定、習慣法乃至於條理的運用,以作為民事審判的法源依據。此外,特別從當代法學方法以及英美判例法體系比較等觀點,檢討大理院判例的性質。最後得出大理院判例不僅帶有「條理」的法源性質,更具有「裁判的準立法機能」,可以提供「創新規範、闡釋法律及漏洞補充」等作用。
英文關鍵詞: Undivided Civil Law and Criminal LawDivision of Civil Law and Criminal LawDali Yuan (the Chinese Supreme Court in 1906- 1927)Legal SourceCustomLegal DecisionsJurisprudence
英文摘要: The compilation style of the traditional Chinese code of laws is a quite controversial issue. One could pose the questions: “Was it divided between civil law and criminal law or not”? “Even though civil law and criminal law were not formally divided, were they not divided in many aspects”? First, this article refers to how the old law system was transformed into new ones in the late Qing Dynasty. The old Qing Code (Da Qing L u Li) was not divided into civil law and criminal law. The new Qing Code contained a penal code (Da Qing Xin Xing Lu) and a civil code (Da Qing Min Lu). Secondly, this article describes how the Supreme Court (Dali Yuan) referred to and made use of the civil regulations, customs, and methods of the old Qing Code (Da Qing Xian Xing Xing Lu) as the legal source of civil cases in the early Republican period (1912-1927). At that time, the Chinese Government had not yet enacted a new civil code. President Yuan Shihkai (1859-1916) permitted the use of the old Qing Code for most legal cases. Thirdly, we review the legal decisions of the Dali Yuan in terms of the legal methods of the time, and compare it with the case law system. Finally, we arrive at the conclusion that the legal decisions of the Dali Yuan were important in creating new norms in interpreting and in filling the gaps in the existing law code.
目  次: 壹、序說
貳、晚清「民刑分立」的立法濫觴與司法實踐
一、立法開端
二、司法轉型
參、民初大理院民事紛爭解決的法源順序
一、習慣法
二、條理
三、法律
肆、民初大理院判決(例)在法學方法上的運用詮釋
一、《大清現行刑律》如何換裝成民事審判的法源依據?
二、大理院時期「判例」的性質是否屬英美法系的判例法(Case law)?
(一)肯定說
(二)否定說
(三)我的看法
三、《大清民律草案》的性質與地位宜如何看待?
伍、結語
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
    相關論著:
    返回功能列