查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- Standing in the U.S. Courts: A Rawlsian Justice Perspective
- Flutamide-Induced Liver Injury: A Case Report
- The Price Relationships Among the Hong Kong, Taiwan and China Stock Markets: An Application of Cointegration Approach
- 臺灣的股價與總體變數之間的關係
- 民事損害賠償責任法上因果關係之結構分析以及損害賠償之基本原則
- 美、日、香港與臺灣四地股價指數連動關係之探討
- 論「精確線型理性預期模型計量方法」應用之限制
- 論我國法上交易安全義務理論之建立
- 臺灣股票市場與總體經濟變數之因果關係研究:二元VAR模型網狀檢定
- 影響雲林地區土地價格關鍵因素之研究
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | Standing in the U.S. Courts: A Rawlsian Justice Perspective=美國法院之當事人適格:以羅爾斯正義觀點論之 |
---|---|
作 者 | 廖宗聖; | 書刊名 | 東海大學法學研究 |
卷 期 | 52 2017.08[民106.08] |
頁 次 | 頁1-47 |
分類號 | 586.116 |
關鍵詞 | 當事人適格; 羅爾斯正義; 事實上損害; 因果關係; 可救濟性; Standing; Rawlsian justice; Injury-in-fact; Causation; Redressability; |
語 文 | 英文(English) |
中文摘要 | 美國憲法第三條規定司法權力僅限於「案件」和「爭議」,但該條並未清楚闡明何謂「案件」及「爭議」。美國最高法院透過詮釋指標性案件指出,當事人適格原則是構成案件或爭議的核心要件,它包含三個要素:事實上損害、因果關係及可救濟性。然而當事人適格原則已被認為是當代法律中最令人困惑及充滿問題的概念。本文之目的即在以突破性的方式,探尋當事人適格原則的內含要素,並嘗試提出:在特定的角度下,若當事人適格此一原則並不是一種實體上的法律權利,也不是一種程序上的法律權利,透過正義的觀點來探討當事人適格原則更為妥當,而羅爾斯正義論可以是檢視當前美國法院詮釋當事人適格原則的有利工具。 |
英文摘要 | Article III of the U.S. Constitution limits judicial power to "cases" and "controversies," but it does not clearly say what "case" means and what "controversy" is. The Supreme Court has interpreted via landmark cases that standing doctrine is the core element of the case-or-controversy requirement and has three elements: injury-in-fact, causation, and redressability. However, standing has proven to be a confusing and problematic concept in modern law. The purpose of this article is to find a groundbreaking way to define the criteria of standing. This article tries to argue that if, viewed from the specific angle, standing is not encompassed by substantive rights or procedural rights, it is better to devise its doctrine through the lens of justice. And, Rawls' justice theory could be a good tool for examining the current standing doctrine laid out by the court. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。