【作者】 胡桥；

【导师】 何勤华；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法大学 ， 法律史， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 本文主要从英美法律思想史的角度,围绕衡平法的神圣化与世俗化,应然衡平法与实然衡平法的斗争与妥协这两条主线,对衡平法的兴起、转型、鼎盛和衰落的整个过程作了描述,勾勒出衡平法从神意到人意,从自然法到实在法,从道德法到规则法的基本演变轨迹,认为衡平法的道路,主要是一条规则之路或去道德化之路,并提出了中国法律衡平的道路问题。本文的正文由三部分构成：导论；本论：结论。本论部分共有四章：首先,分别论述了衡平法兴起的背景、原因和标志,旨在揭示衡平法的道路是如何形成的。作者认为,衡平法的兴起有两大背景,即教皇革命与普通法的成熟。教皇革命是衡平法兴起的历史前提,而普通法的成熟则是衡平法兴起的法律前提。这种前提性的探讨,不仅把教皇革命与衡平法联系起来,而且使衡平法置于整个英美法系的历史之中,从而大大拓宽了衡平法的研究视野,深化了其研究意义,打破了只以普通法的僵化作为衡平法起因的狭隘观点。衡平法的兴起有三大原因,即普通法的僵化、国王的干预及大法官的救济。普通法的僵化是衡平法兴起的法律原因,国王的干预是衡平法兴起的政治原因,而大法官的救济则是衡平法兴起的关键或根本原因。衡平法的兴起有三大标志,即特别救济程序的出现、大法官的良心、特别司法管辖权的确立。特别司法管辖权的确立是二元衡平法形成和兴起的根本标志,因为它赋予了特别救济程序及大法官良心的世俗法或法律的属性。特别救济程序是一种程序法,或者是一种人定法、实在法、人意法；大法官的良心是一种实体法,或者是一种自然法、应然法、神意法,这二者合起来就构成了衡平法,而且是一种二元的衡平法。其次,分别论述了衡平法转型的肇端；大法官身份的转变；衡平法院的成长,旨在揭示衡平法的道路是如何转折和发展的。作者认为,英格兰的宗教改革及法律世俗主义的兴盛是衡平法转型的肇端。16世纪英格兰宗教改革之后,衡平法发生了历史转型,即从神意衡平法、神法转向人意衡平法、道德法。这一历史转型的思想动力,源自作为宗教改革产物的法律世俗主义。大法官身份由教士向律师的转变,是衡平法实现历史转型的首要标志。作为衡平法继往开来的两个关键人物：一是衡平法的崇高地位的奠基人,也是教士大法官的杰出代表——托马斯·沃尔西枢机主教；另一是第一位世俗大法官,却满怀道德情怀的——托马斯·莫尔爵士。这两位大法官是衡平法实现由教士向世俗法律专家转型的典型代表。衡平法院的机构独立和目的转向,尤其是特别衡平法院的崛起,是衡平法实现历史转型的第二大标志,即如何从文秘署发展成衡平法院；衡平法院如何实现从良心救赎到社会控制的目的转向。另外,以星室法院为代表的特别衡平法院的崛起,也对衡平法的发展产生了重大影响。再次,分别论述了衡平法的辉煌一页；实体衡平法的形成以及作为衡平法扩张的结果——美国衡平法的产生,旨在揭示衡平法的道路是如何扩展为一条大道的。作者认为,1616年衡平法院的胜利,是衡平法历史上最光辉的一页,除大名鼎鼎的培根外,诺丁汉,哈德威克、曼斯菲尔德、埃尔登,堪称衡平法历史上的四驾马车。正是在他们的牵动下,衡平法才最终走上现代的规则之路。随着法律科学理论的产生,道德的衡平法理学开始转向技术的衡平法理学,推动这一转向的是以爱德华·科克和马修·黑尔等为代表的普通法学家。而衡平法格言的出现以及衡平法先例的确立,既是技术的衡平法理学在司法实践中的具体运用,也是实体衡平法形成的标志。这表明衡平法自14、15世纪以来充当实体法的良心,到17、18世纪已经发展成一种有形的实体法。这样,缺少实在内容的、以程序法为特征的早期衡平法完全变成一种既有实在内容,又有程序规定的现代衡平法。美国衡平法正式产生于独立之后。清教徒认为,因个人的愚蠢和不慎所导致的损害不应该得到救济,因而对衡平法持否定态度。但后来随着社会和法律的不断发展,越来越多的人从法律实用主义的立场出发开始拥护衡平法。因此,在是否继受衡平法的问题上形成了两派：其一是“糟得很”的观点,其二是“好得很”的观点。这也是美国各州为何对衡平法具有截然不同的继受态度的深层原因。最后,通过介绍狄更斯的《荒凉山庄》,19世纪末英国和美国的司法改革以及现在衡平法的状况,论述了衡平法在19世纪后如何衰落、如何趋于瓦解,尤其强调了司法改革对于衡平法乃至整个普通法所造成的深远影响。旨在揭示衡平法的道路如何趋于衰落。作者认为,由于狄更斯从童年起就生活在衡平法的阴影下,到青年时期又在衡平法院做过书记官,这些磨难和经历,为他写作《荒凉山庄》提供了动机和素材。《荒凉山庄》的出版,成为一般民众了解衡平法院及衡平法的窗口。后来的事实证明,《荒凉山庄》一书充当了19世纪末期司法改革的宣传机和播种机。衡平法的延迟是由当时英国民事司法制度的整体缺陷和衡平法的内在缺陷共同所致。其中,确定性的缺乏、大法官人数的不足及严格遵循先例是衡平法内在缺陷的主要表现。衡平法的瓦解始于法律实证主义的进攻,其代表人物是英国的边沁与奥斯丁,美国的肯特与斯托里、菲尔德与兰德尔。边沁与奥斯丁指责衡平法充满道德内容,因而缺乏确定性。所以,应然或道德的衡平法不是“法”,只有实在法才是法律。肯特与斯托里从实证法的立场出发,对于美国衡平法进行了改造。而菲尔德则完全走上了法典化的道路,兰德尔建立起法律形式主义的体系或概念法学。1873年的英国司法改革和19世纪末的美国司法改革,就是这种法律实证主义理论的一种必然结果。司法改革后,英国的衡平法院变成了大法官庭,美国的衡平法院除个别州保留外,其在绝大多数州已被撤并于普通法院。实在衡平法与普通法发生融合,表明二元的衡平法体系已趋于瓦解。衡平法的衰落指的是由二元衡平法变为一元衡平法的过程,也即,这是一个应然衡平法或道德衡平法的衰落,是实在衡平法与普通法融合的过程或趋势。当衡平法由二元变为一元,也即应然或道德成分被予以剔除,意味着衡平法的精神或灵魂已不存在。这样,经典的衡平法已经死亡。而司法改革后或现在的衡平法其实就是普通法。衡平法的衰落,是19世纪末以边沁、奥斯丁为首的实证主义法学的胜利。但是,实证主义在抛弃法的应然或道德成分之后,带给法律乃至整个社会的则是一场更大的危机。在当代英国和美国,法律实证主义是其基本立场,它决定了英国和美国实行的必然是一种规则至上的形式法治路线。由于法律的应然或道德成分被予以否定,20世纪的法律因而陷入了危机。但自“二战”以来,随着分析实证法学与自然法学、社会法学的三足鼎立,整个西方法学开始出现一种由分析走向综合、由形式走向实质的趋势。尽管这一切还谈不上衡平法的复兴,但这起码解释了衡平法至今“不死”的道理。在结论部分,作者总结指出,衡平法从兴起、转型、鼎盛到衰落已走出了一条司法之路、规则之路或去道德化之路。从司法角度看,衡平法的道路是一条司法之路,这条道路在19世纪末随着衡平法院的撤销,已宣告此路不通；从法律发展角度看,衡平法的道路又是一条规则之路,直到今天英国和美国仍然走在这条道路之上。从道德角度看,衡平法的道路是一条道德的法律化之路或去道德化之路,这条道路在17、18世纪随着实体衡平法的形成已初露锋芒,但到19世纪末的司法改革中,这条道路被推向极端,道德的法律化之路变成了一条消灭道德的之路。综上,从某种意义上说,衡平法的辉煌与衰落,是英国人为了驯服自然法和道德,为现代社会建构一套明确、肯定的规则之路的伟大探索。它启发我们,在飞速发展的现代社会,如何对待法律的确定性?如何界定道德的地位和作用?如何处理道德与法律的关系?如何划分严格司法与自由裁量权的合理界限?特别是在中国这样一个道德大国,我们最终不得不回答,我们法律的问题在哪里?我们法律的衡平道路到底是什么?更多还原

【Abstract】 Based on two mainlines:the sanctification & secularization of Equity; and the struggle and compromise of Sollen-equity & Sein-equity, from the aspect of History of Anglo-American legal thoughts, this dissertation roughly describes the whole developing process of Equity:its rising, transformation, culmination and decay. It draws the outline of the development of Equity:from Devine Will to Mortal Will, from Natural Law to Positive Law, and from Moral Law to Regulated Law. Thus, it proposes that the process of Equity is a process of judiciary, regulation or moral legalization. Meanwhile, it puts forward the problem of the developing process of Equity in China.This dissertation consists of three main parts:introduction, body and conclusion.The body comprises four chapters as follows:First, the author introduces the rising of Equity. The background, causes and marks are dissertated respectively to show how the way of Equity is formed.Section one discusses two important backgrounds of the rising of Equity:the Pope revolution and the maturity of Common Law. The author believes that the Pope revolution was the historical premise of Equity, while the maturity of Common Law was the legal premise of Equity. By discussing the premises, the author not only connects Equity with the Pope revolution, but lays it in the history of the system of Anglo-American Law, so that the research vision of Equity is widened, its research significance is deepened and the narrow view that the inflexibility of Common Law was the cause of Equity is broken.Section two discusses the three causes of the rising of Equity:the inflexibility of Common Law, the intervention of the king and the relief from the chancellor. The author believes that the inflexibility of Common Law was the legal cause of the rising of Equity, that the intervention of the king was its political cause and that the relief from the chancellor was the fundamental cause.Section three discusses the three marks of the rising of Equity:the conscience of the chancellor, the occurrence of special relief program and the establishment of the special Judicial Jurisdiction. The author believes that the establishment of the special Judicial Jurisdiction was the fundamental mark of the rising and formation of Equity, for it vested the property of law in the conscience of the chancellor and the special relief program. The conscience of the chancellor is a kind of substantive law, or we can say it’s a kind of natural law or sollen law or sacred law; while the special relief program is a kind of procedural law, or a kind of human law or positive law or law of mortal will. Putting the two together forms Equity and it is a kind of dual Equity.Next, the author discourses on such aspects as the origin of transformation of Equity, the identity change of the chancellor and the growth of the court of Equity to disclose how the way of Equity shifted and developed.Section one analyses the origin of transformation of Equity, that is the England Reformation and the thriving of secularism of law. The author insists that after the England Reformation in 16th century, Equity made its historical transformation-from the Divine Will Equity or Divine Law to Mortal Will Equity or Moral Law. The driver of that transformation was the secularism of law, which was the result of the Reformation.The identity change of the chancellor was the first mark in the realization of transformation of Equity. Two most important chancellors were mentioned in this section. One was Thomas Cardinal Wolsey, father of Equity and a prominent representative of archbishop chancellor. The other was Sir Thomas More, the first secularistic chancellor and a man of morality. The two chancellor were the representatives in the process of identity change from bishop chancellors to secularistic law experts.The institution independence and the change of purpose of the court of Equity, especially the growing up of the court of Equity was the second mark in the realization of transformation of Equity. In this part the author explains how the chancery developed to the court of Equity and how the court of Equity changed its purpose from conscience relief to social control. Moreover, the thriving of special court of Equity, of which Star Chamber was a representative, had profound influence on the development of Equity.Then, it demonstrates respectively the splendor of Equity; the formation of the entity of Equity; the result of the expansion of Equity and the occurrence of American Equity to reveal how the way of Equity expands into a broad way.The author believes that the victory of the court of Equity in 1616 was the most splendid moment in the history of Equity. Besides renowned Francis Bacon, Lord Nottinghanm, Lord Hardwicke, Mansfield and Lord Eldon were the most famous person bringing equity to the way of regulation.With the appearance of the scientific theory of law, the moral Equity theory turned into technical Equity theory. The pushers of that change are the common jurists, with Edward Coke and Matthew Hill as the representatives. While the appearance of the Equity maxim and the formation of the rule of precedent of Equity was not only the application of technical Equity theory in judicial practice, but also the mark of the formation of the entity of Equity. This shows that from the 14th-15th centuries to the 17th-18th centuries, the conscience, being the entity law, had developed into a kind of tangible entity law. Thus, the previous Equity which lack of concrete content and was characterized by procedural law had totally changed into a modern Equity with concrete content and programmed regulations.American Equity occurred after the nation’s independence. The puritans thought damages caused by personal folly or carelessness should not be relieved, so they objected to Equity. Later, with the development of society and law, some of them began to support Equity from the standpoint of pragmatism. Thus, two denominations occurred:one held the worst view; the other held the best view. That is also the profound reason why different states in America hold entirely different attitudes toward Equity.Finally, the author discusses the decadence of Equity. In this chapter, the author explains the process of its decadence and collapse by quoting some plots of Charles Dickens’Bleak House and by introducing the judicial reformation in both Britain and the U.S. in the 19th century and the current situation of their equity. Moreover, the author underscores the profound influence on Equity and even the Common Law as a result of judicial reformation and reveals how the Equity fell into the decadence.Considering that Charles Dickens’childhood was deeply affected by Equity and that the English writer once worked as a clerk in a Court of Equity, the author believes that all of these motivated Charles Dickens to compose the fiction of Bleak House and somewhat became the material of the novel. In a sense, the fiction became a way for the masses to learn about Equity. As was demonstrated by the facts later, the Bleak House became a propaganda novel on judicial reformation in 19th century. The delay of Equity was a result of limitation of civil judicial system and the interior flaw of Equity. The lack of certainty, deficiency of chancellor and adherence to precedent were the main evidences of interior flaw.The author pointed out that the collapse of Equity can be traced back to the period when it was aggressed by Passivism, whose spokesman are Jeremy Bentham and John Austin in Britain and James Kent, Joseph Story, as well as David Dadley Field and Christopher Langdell in America. Jeremy Bentham and John Austin declared that the Equity was full of morality and lack of stability. Thus, it is the positive laws but not the sollen or moral equity can be called Law. James Kent and Joseph Story amend the American Equity on the position of positive laws, while David Dadley Field paved a path for the codification of American laws and Christopher Langdell established the system of Judicial Formulism or Begriffs Jurisprudence. Therefore, the judicial reformation in Britain in the year 1873 as well as in American at the end of the 19th century is a certain consequence of the development of the judicial positivism theory. After the judicial reformation, the Court of Equity in England became to Chancellor Court, while in the U.S., Most of Courts of Equity were combined with court of common law expect in a few states. Heretofore, the positive equity had been mixed with common laws, which suggested the collapse of the Equity system.The author holds on the opinion that the collapse of the equity refers to the process which the dualistic equity changed into a unitary one, and the process which can also be regarded as one in which the sollen equity or moral equity got collapsed and the sollen equity inclined to mix with common laws. The dualistic equity changing into a unitary equity, namely, the sollen or moral elements being erased, means the lost of soul or the spirit of Equity. Then, the classic equity actually is dead. So the current equities and after the judicial reformation are actually common laws. The decadence of the equity at the same time is the victory of the positive laws lead by Jeremy Bentham and John Austin in the 19th century. However, the positive laws which have thrown away the sollen or moral value elements bring to our society a stronger strike.Positivism is a fundamental view in the contemporary society of Britain and America and the two countries have regulation-orient formal rule of law accordingly. The jurisprudence in 20th century came to a crisis because of denial of the essence of sollen or morality. However, after World WarⅡ, analytical positivism jurisprudence, nature jurisprudence and social jurisprudence stood like the three legs of a tripod. As a result, the whole western jurisprudence had a tendency featuring from analysis to integration and from form to substance. Though it was far from revival of Equity, it explains why it doesn’t disappear so far.The author insists that the process taken by the equity from its rising, transformation, culmination to its decadence has paved a way to justice or regulation or demoralization. From the stand point of judicial view, the way lead by equity is a way to justice, but was declared to a dead end as the abolishing of the Court of Equity. From the point of legal view, it is also a way to regulation, and till now Britain and America is still on this way. And from the moral point of view, which is opposite to regulation one, it is a way of legislating of moralities or getting rid of moralities, which appeared in the 17th and 18th centuries when the positive equity emerged and now the way is push up to its climax to in the judicial reformation in the 19th century and now it has change into a way of destroying moralities.Generally speaking, the splendor and decadence of Equity is great experiments in establishing a tangible and affirmative way to regulation for the society by English for the purpose of dominate the nature and moralities. It enlightens us with the questions as follows:How to look on certainty of law in the booming modern society? How to define the status and functions of morality? How to tackle the relationship between morality and law? How to balance discretion and practising judicatory strictly, especially in a county like China with great moralities? Pondering these questions thoroughly, we may have the answers to the last two issues:What are the problems of the legislation? What on earth is the path of Equity?更多还原