如何界定社会公共利益——以“电梯劝烟猝死案”切入  

How to Define the Social Public Interest—Discussion Based on the Case of'Discouraging Smoking in the Elevator"

作　　者：吴义龙[1] Wu Yilong

机构地区：[1]河南大学法学院

出　　处：《南大法学》2020年第2期73-90,共18页NanJing University Law Journal

摘　　要：围绕"电梯劝烟猝死案",本文讨论了如何界定社会公共利益以及如何看待与之类似的抽象法律概念。学界认为必须在法律条文中清晰准确地对抽象法律概念进行界定。这种思路的困境在于立法者实际上很难对抽象法律概念进行确切的界定,其根源是忽视了抽象法律概念背后的法律原则的功能,即作为规则的例外处理,而例外是无法事前预期的。从结果而不是从前提出发适用抽象法律原则是本文的核心论断,由此引出一种事后通过具体案件结果来判断法官是否滥用司法裁量权从而对其进行适当限制的思路,这不同于学界通过事前借助各种强制性措施来限制司法裁量权的观点。Centering on"the case of discouraging smoking in the elevator",this paper discusses how to define the social public interest and how to view similar abstract legal concepts.Scholars believe that abstract legal concepts must be clearly and accurately defined in the legal provisions.The dilemma of this kind of thinking lies in the fact that it is difficult for the legislator to define the abstract legal concept,which is rooted in neglecting the function of the legal principle behind the abstract legal concept.Applying the abstract law principle from the result rather than a premise,and this leads to a way of judging whether the judge abused the judicial discretion by the result of the specific case afterwards so as to limit it appropriately,which is different from the academic view that the judicial discretion is limited by various coercive measures in advance.

关 键 词：社会公共利益 原则 规则 例外 司法裁量权 

分 类 号：D920.5[政治法律—法学] D925.1