检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:孙良国[1] Sun Liangguo
机构地区:[1]吉林大学法学院
出 处:《法治现代化研究》2018年第4期107-114,共8页Law and Modernization
摘 要:郑州电梯劝烟案的二审裁判引起了广泛的社会影响和深入的学术讨论。法律经济学的视角可以提出、论证、解答该案比较独特的问题。该案在法律适用上并没有特别的创新,只有在特定的法律与社会互动影响的语境下,其价值和意义才可能得到有效的说明和阐释。从结果妥当性上,二审的结果完全符合法律的理想标准,即有效地引导未来的人的正当行为和塑造理想的社会秩序。但该种情况只是特例,不能创设一般性的规则。The adjudication made by the second instance to the lawsuit caused by the anti-smoking dissuasion taking place in an elevator in Zhengzhou has attracted wide public and academic attention. If viewed from the perspective of law and economics, the case can be better established, analyzed and resolved. As a matter of fact, there is little innovation in the application of relevant law in the settlement of this case. Its value and contribution can be effectively exposed and explained only when it is put into the context constituted by the interaction between law and society. In terms of the appropriateness of the result, the adjudication of the second instance is well in line with the ideal criteria set by the law, i.e. to effectively lead people to reasonable act and shape the ideal social order. However, the settlement of this lawsuit can only be accepted as a specific case rather than a case from which a general principle can be established.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.117