通过类案比较实现“类案同判”——以司法场域分析为视角  

Achieve the Same Judgment for Similar Cases Through the Comparison of Similar Cases: From a Perspective of Judicial Field Analysis

作　　者：刘磊[1] Liu Lei

机构地区：[1]西南财经大学法学院

出　　处：《地方立法研究》2022年第2期95-111,共17页Local Legislation Journal

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“我国成文法体制下判例运用的理论与实践”(18ZDA138)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：长期以来,法律适用不统一是困扰我国司法实践的现实问题,矛盾性裁判对司法公信力产生严重损伤。在此背景下,通过类案检索与比较促进“类案同判”成为最高人民法院积极倡导的一种重要方式并逐渐迈向制度化建构。在实践中,客观意义上的“类案”、实际运用的“类案”以及最终影响裁判的“类案”并不完全一致。律师等诉讼主体对类案运用产生实质性影响,不仅是类案检索与比较规则的遵从者,也是此种秩序的参与者和塑造者。基于司法场域的分析表明,律师深受法官提升审判效率、规避职业风险的理性行为逻辑影响,倾向于以简约化、差序性方式呈现类案检索与比较结果。若要高效检索和运用类案,需掌握类案检索的双重目标,即检索判例的权威性(目标Ⅰ)和判例借鉴的直接性(目标Ⅱ)。类案比较的操作原则主要体现为法院层级优先考量、时间因素恰当把握、审委会讨论重点关注、专业性和地域性综合权衡。揭示并阐述类案比较的实然状态,可以为实现“类案同判”提供现实进路。For a long time, inconsistent application of law has been a real problem plaguing judicial practice in China, and contradictory decisions have caused serious damage to judicial credibility. Against this backdrop, the promotion of “uniformity in the application of law” through case search and comparison has become an important approach actively advocated by the Supreme People’s Court and is gradually moving towards institutionalization. In practice, the objective meaning, the actual use and the ultimate impact of “Similar Cases” are not entirely consistent. Lawyers and other litigants have a substantial impact on the use of similar cases, not only as followers of the rules of similar cases’ search and comparison, but also as participants and shapers. The analysis based on the judicial field shows that lawyers are influenced by the judge’s rational behavioral logic of enhancing the efficiency of trials and avoiding professional risks, and tend to present the results of class searches and comparisons in a minimalist manner and differential order. In order to efficiently retrieve and use similar cases, it is necessary to grasp the dual objectives of class case retrieval, i.e., the authority of jurisprudence retrived(Objective I) and the directness of jurisprudence drawn on(Objective II). The operating principles of cases comparison are mainly the priority of the court level, the appropriate time factor, the attention of trial committee, and the balance between professionalism and geography. The actual state of comparative cases can be revealed and elaborated, which can provide a realistic way to realize the “Same Judgment for Similar Cases”.

关 键 词：类案比较 类案同判 司法场域 现实进路 

分 类 号：D926[政治法律—法学]