摘要
在普通法系国家的司法裁判中,法官利益衡量的展开颇具特色,有具体的操作规范和特定的标准,绝非法官的恣意妄为。依据法律所要实现的价值和目标,普通法系法官在司法裁判中所要衡量的利益可以类分为由法律的确定性所服务于的社会利益和由正义所服务于的社会利益。这两种社会利益之间如何进行衡量,两者之中何者具有优先性,法官的判断需要遵循特定的标准,包括以遵循法律为内容的法律之内的标准和以法律的社会目的为考量的法律之外的标准。普通法系法官的利益衡量展开过程在"雅各布诉肯特案"中得到了很好的体现。我们从中可以得出关于司法裁判中法官如何更好地展开利益衡量这一问题的启示。
In countries of the common law tradition, the judge＇ s balance of interests is by no means arbitrary, but cording to the social values must follow concrete operational and objectives to be achieved by norms and specific standards. law, the interests balanced by ges in the administration of justice in common law countries can be divided into two catego social interests served by the determinacy of law and social interests served by justice. To Ac- jud- ries ： bal- ance these two categories of social interests and determine the priority between them, judges need to follow particular standards, including the inner-law standards, which emphasize the ob- servance of law, and the outer-law standards, which stress the consideration of the social objec- tives to be achieved by law. The process of the judge＇ s balancing of interests in common law countries is embodied quite well in the case of ＂Jacobs ＆ Youngs, Incorporated v. Kent＂. Chi- nese scholars and judges can draw some inspirations from the experience of common law coun- tries when balancing different interests in the administration of justice
出处
《环球法律评论》
CSSCI
北大核心
2016年第3期33-49,共17页
Global Law Review
基金
作者主持的2015年中国法理学研究会青年专项课题“利益衡量的客观化与司法的确定性”(2015@FL007)的研究成果
