查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
| 題 名 | 試論判例作為民法第1條之習慣法:為我國判例制度而辯護=The Precedent Refers as the Custom of Taiwan's Civil Code §1 |
|---|---|
| 作 者 | 吳從周; | 書刊名 | 國立臺灣大學法學論叢 |
| 卷 期 | 39:2 2010.06[民99.06] |
| 頁 次 | 頁227-299 |
| 分類號 | 580.11 |
| 關鍵詞 | 判例; 習慣; 習慣法; 法官法; 法源; 民法第1條; 規範上拘束力; 個案規範; Precedent; Custom; Custom law; Judge-made law; The resource of law; Taiwan's civil code §1; Legal obligation; The standard formed by a case; Fallnorm; |
| 語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
| 中文摘要 | 判例制度在我國實務運作上具有相當之重要性與特殊性。司法院釋字第576號解釋的協同意見書,質疑我國最高法院實施近八十年的判例制度違憲,啟人深思。 筆者特別從習慣法作為法源已喪失其現代意義的空洞化現象,以及習慣法「判例法化」,習慣法非透過判例法無從產生的基點出發,企圖提出:「判例要旨所宣示的法律見解」,在我國具有「民法第1條習慣法之位階」的「規範上效力」之基本命題,嘗試重新定位判例為我國民法第1條之習慣法。希望能夠解決爭論已久的「判例」有無規範上拘束力之問題,並使空洞化的「習慣法」可以藉由法官法的重新注入,而獲得新的生命與內涵。 |
| 英文摘要 | The system of precedent in the practice during the trial has played a significant role und formed its own characters for the past 6 decades in Taiwan. The dissenting opinions of The Interpretation of the Council of Grant Justices No. 576 assumed that the system of precedent implemented by our supreme court is more likely to violate the constitution. These opinions for us are worth reconsidering again in this essay. I especially try to submit the following new explainations, namely: ”The ratio decidendi declared in the precedent has obtained the same status as the custom of §1 of Taiwan's civil code with the legal obligation” according to the basic point of view which points out that the custom as the second most important resource of laws has lost its modern definiton and effectiveness. Through such a new definition the struggles relating to the status of the precedent can expectively be resolved. The custom law which is gradually losing its original definition in modern society could therefore be restored and used in our modern society. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。