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:张铁薇[1] 陈茂春[1] ZHANG Tie-wei;CHEN Mao-chun(School of Law,Heilongjiang University,Harbin 150080,China)
出 处:《商业研究》2021年第4期137-145,共9页Commercial Research
基 金:黑龙江省经济社会发展重点研究课题“黑龙江省优化营商环境背景下调解工作信用机制建设策略研究”,项目编号:20546。
摘 要:“网络条款”作为修订后的《反不正当竞争法》的新增类型化条款,其司法实践中陷入适用困境的根源在于忽视了对消费者利益的独立考量。司法过程中,通过填充消费者利益标准并以之为核心对网络条款进行限缩解释既可以精细化认知模型,增强法律适用的确定性,又可以有效防止法律对竞争行为的过度干预,是破解适用困境的根本之道。而从证据法学向度理解网络条款的含义与适用规则,将限缩解释后的消费者利益标准转化为消费者选择自由受损要件,则对进一步优化网络条款司法适用,有效保护合理竞争具有重要意义。As a new type of clause in the revised Anti-unfair Competition Law,“Network Provisions”is in a dilemma in judicial practice because it ignores the independent consideration of consumers′interests.In the judicial process,by filling in the consumers′interests standard and taking it as the core,we can not only refine the cognitive model,enhance the certainty of the application of law,but also effectively prevent the excessive intervention of the law on the competitive behavior,which is the fundamental way to solve the application dilemma.It is of great significance to further optimize the judicial application of network provisions and effectively protect reasonable competition to understand the meaning and application rules of network provisions from the perspective of evidence law and transform the standard of consumers′interests after limited interpretation into the elements of consumers′freedom of choice.
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:216.73.216.222