民初大理院抵制“治外法权”之路径析论  

Analysis of the Path of Dali Academy in Its Struggle against"Extraterritoriality"in the Early Period of Republic of China ——Centered on Civil Case Collection of the Dali Academy

作　　者：陈晓枫[1] 李梦媛 CHEN Xiao-feng;LI Meng-yuan(Law School,Wuhan University,Wuhan 430072,China)

机构地区：[1]武汉大学法学院,武汉430072

出　　处：《江苏行政学院学报》2024年第3期123-129,共7页The Journal of Jiangsu Administration Institute

基　　金：国家社科基金项目“中华法文化的话语体系研究”(18BFX026)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：自唐开始,中国在涉外司法案件中形成以“属地主义”为管辖原则的“司法主权”传统。然而近代中国因鸦片战争战败,冲击潼灭原存的涉外法律原则,列强以“治外法权”颠覆原有传统,大理院则以收回治外法权为目的,改寺为院。其利用审判章程与行政规章的管辖间隙,援引国际私法,择取对自身有利的理论学说,获得案件管辖权,适用中法为法准据,以使中国司法权正当行使,同时也纠正“媚外曲法”案件的审判结果,排除“治外法权”对中国司法侵扰。Since the Tang Dynasty,China had developed a tradition of"judicial sovereignty"in foreign-related legal cases,based on the principle of"territory".However,the defeat in the Opium Wars in modern history disrupted the existing principles related to foreign affairs laws.The western powers subverted the traditional judicial sovereignty with"extraterritorial rights";in response,the Dali Academy aimed at the recovery of these rights and transformed itself from the former"institute"system to a court of law.The Dali Academy took advantage of the gaps between trial procedures and administrative regulations,referred on international private laws,and selectively adopted theories favorable to its interests.It sought jurisdiction over cases and applied Chinese law as the legal basis to legitimately exercise Chinese judicial authority.At the same time,the Dali Academy corrected trial outcomes of cases that excessively favored foreigners,thereby mitigating the intrusion of"extraterritorial rights"over Chinese judiciary.

关 键 词：大理院 治外法权 司法主权 抵制路径 

分 类 号：D909.92[政治法律—法学理论]