论自由裁量权与冲突法价值取向

【作者】 杜颖；

【导师】 刘想树；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 国际私法， 2004， 硕士

【摘要】 自由裁量权不是冲突法中独有的现象，作为司法权不可或缺的部分，它是法律领域中古老的问题。但法官选择准据法这一过程的特殊性使得自由裁量权在冲突法中也体现出了特殊的重要性。更为重要的是，裁量空间的大小还体现出了冲突法价值取向上追求的是形式正义还是实质正义。进入二十世纪特别是二战后，冲突法领域出现的种种现象都说明了现代冲突法更加个案化，更加灵活化，这必然伴随着法官裁量空间的相对扩大，这也说明实质正义矫正形式正义是社会现实发展的必然要求。对我国来说，冲突法(或国际私法)的法典化尚未完成，研究冲突法领域的自由裁量对将来的立法有着重要的指导意义。 本文共三万余字，在结构上分为四个部分，分别论述了冲突法价值取向的演变、冲突法价值转型阶段中的自由裁量权、现代冲突法中自由裁量权的体现和如何完善我国冲突法中自由裁量权： 随着以最密切联系原则为代表的新兴制度的出现，一些古老的制度如识别、反致、公共秩序保留等也表现出更为弹性化的趋势。这些现象的出现不是偶然的，它反映出冲突法价值取向上的变化。本文的第一部分就着眼于冲突法价值取向的演变。正义分为两个层次，在基本的正义要求之外，第二个层次的正义总是与特定时期、特定国家的需要相适应的。广泛的自由裁量权和严苛详尽的规则是司法中此消彼长的两种形式，在它们背后体现出的是实质正义与形式正义两种不同的价值追求。在传统的冲突法中，由于社会、政治、法学理论环境的要求，形式正义和严格规则居于统治地位；但随着时代的发展，新的社会、政治、法学理论要求重拾实质正义，用自由裁量权修正严格规则在实践中带来的种种弊端，达到实质正义与形式正义的结合，实现新时期里特定国家的特定利益需求。因此，现代冲突法重视自由裁量权，给予法官的裁量空间是自中世纪以来前所未有的。 本文的第二部分在第—部分的分析基础上，进一步讨论了冲突法价值转型阶段中的自由裁量权。通过对其定义的分析，归纳出了自由裁量权的三大本质特点即法律授权性、模糊性和个案公正性。它们三者并不是孤立存在的，而是有着密不可分的联系。同时由于权力与生俱来的自我扩张性，我们必须对裁量空间进行限制。只有经过合理的规制的自由裁量权，才有可能实现以实质正义修正形式正义的价值追求。 本文的第三部搬眼于对刘冲突法中承载着自由裁量权的几种重要制度断简要分析。它们触u是：最密切联系原则、公共鹏保留、反致与识别、批法律排方法和弹性规则。通过这些派可以看出这几种制度在灵活性方面都有着高度的相似性，它们都是一种对法官的授权，都具有相对的模糊性，也都以实现法律甜的个案化、帖u化为目标。作为独立的忡，它们都符合自由裁量精一共性的输邮。 第四部她我国的冲突法中有关自由裁量权的条款设七十进行了探讨。笔者认为，在已经明确了赋予法官自由裁量权必要性的前提下，与国外先进立法相比，我国的有关立拥对能。整体水平尚欠完备，法官自由裁量权规舶糊、冰，蛐珊已不适应中国对外开放的需要，不适应我国入世的要求。因此笔者尝试对总则以及合同、侵权、婚姻家庭、继承等具体法律彻中的自由裁量权条款晰了一侧步的设计。更多还原

【Abstract】 The discretion is not the special phenomenon in conflict of laws. As a necessary part of judicature, it is an old question in the domain of law. But the special process, that the judge chooses the applicable law, makes the discretion important in the conflict of laws unusually. And which is more important, the dimensions of the discretion reflect the aim of conflict of laws, which is substantial justice or formalistic justice. With the entrance into the 20th century, especially after the 2nd War, all the phenomena within the domain of conflict of laws have showed that the modem conflict of laws is becoming more specific and more flexible, which is accompanied by the relative enlargement of discretion. And the changes show that it is the necessary request of modem society to modify the formalistic justice by substantial justice. In China, the legislation of conflict of laws (or the private international law) has not completed, so it has important meaning to deliberate on the discretion in the domain of conflict of laws.This dissertation is composed of more than 30,000 words and divided into four sections, which respectively discuss the progress of the goal of conflict of laws, the discretion in the changing conflict of laws, the models of modem conflict of laws and how to consummate the discretion in conflict of laws of our country.With the appearance of the newer regulations, in which the doctrine of the most important relationship is the typical delegate, some elder regulations, such as Characterization, Renvoi, Reservation of Public Policy, has showed the tendency to be more flexible. Then phenomena are not fortuitous but reflect the changes on the aim of the conflict of laws. So, the first section focuses on the progress of the goal of conflict laws. The justice can be divided into with different levels. Except the basic request of justice, the other level of justice always gets with the needs of the specific country in specific period. The extensive discretion and the strict regulations are two different kinds of forms, which reflect two different kinds of aims, substantial justice or formalistic justice. Within the traditional conflict of laws, the formalistic justice and the strict regulations have the highest position. But with the development of period, it is the necessary request of the different conditions, which include newer society, politics and theory of law, to modify the strictregulations by discretion, to achieve the aim of integrating substantial justice into formalistic justice. So, modem conflict of laws attaches importance to discretion, and from the Middle Ages, the dimensions give to the judges are more extensive than ever.After these analyses, the second section discusses the discretion within the changing conflict of laws. Depended on the analysis of the definition, the author concludes that the discretion has three distinguishing features, which are to be authorized by law, indistinctness and to pursue the justice specifically. And the three features are not isolated but related to each other. On the hole, they are a united system. Because of the feature of enlarging itself, we must restrict all kinds of power correctly, including discretion. Only after that, the aim of modifying the formalistic justice by the substantial justice can be achieved.And the third section focuses on the concise analysis of several important regulations that reflect the discretion all. There are four regulations: the Doctrine of most important relations, Reservation of Public Policy, Characterization, Renvoi, the new method to choose applicable law and elastic rules. After the analysis we can know that these have highly similar features on flexibility. They are all authorized by law, indistinctness and to pursue the justice specifically. As independent parts, they all conform to the innate characters of discretion.At last, the fourth section discusses the tentative ideas on designing the article of discretion in conflict laws of China. The author holds the view that, on condition that it is clearly更多还原