裁判文书援引学说的基本原理与规则建构
金枫梁裁判文书援引学说的基本原理与规则建构
Fundamental Theory and Rule Construction of Citing Academic Opinions in Judicial Documents
期刊名称：《法学研究》
期刊年份：
作者：金枫梁
单位：上海大学法学院
中文关键词：judicial document; acceptability; citation; academic opinion; general opinion
英文关键词：judicial document; acceptability; citation; academic opinion; general opinion
中文摘要：
学说的内容实质正当性及其约束法官自由裁量空间的外观进而增强裁判可接受性的功能，是裁判文书援引学说的基本原理，也是建构援引规则的出发点。学说根据其竞争力可以分为通说、主流说、少数说，法官既可以援引通说也可以援引非通说；援引非通说应当成为援引的主流。法官在援引学说时应尽量采用对话技术，尤其是在援引通说时应尽量避免对学说进行大篇幅的“复制与粘贴”；应尽量援引不同体裁的代表性作品以体现学说的数量优势外观。学者姓名承担了标识学术产品的质量担保功能、“商誉”功能与司法修辞功能，学说出处具有定位学者学说发展脉络等功能，援引学说须注明姓名与出处。裁判文书援引学术作品实质上是法官“购买”学术产品的行为，它将刺激处于供给侧的学者主动生产实务所需的产品，继而促成学术与实务的良性互动。最高人民法院可以考虑出台有关裁判文书援引学说的具体规则指引。
英文摘要：
The essential legitimacy of the content of academic opinions and the possibility of limiting judges' discretion and enhancing the acceptability of judicial documents through such opinions are the fundaments of citing academic opinions in judicial documents. They are also the starting points of the establishment of rules of citation. According to their influence, academic opinions can be divided into general opinions, prevailing opinions and minority opinions. Judges have the discretion on whether to cite a general opinion or a non-general opinion. Citing of non-general opinions should be encouraged as the main trend. When citing academic opinions in judicial documents, it is advisable that judges adopt a dialogue technique, avoid long paragraph copying and pasting of general opinions, and cite different genres of representative works to demonstrate quantity advantage as far as possible. Scholars' names have the functions of identifying and assuring the quality, goodwill and judicial rhetoric of the academic opinions and the source of academic opinions have the function of showing the development process of the academic opinions of scholars. Therefore, citing a scholar's academic opinions should indicate the scholar's name and the source of the opinions. In essence, citing academic opinions in judicial documents are judges' “purchase” of academic products, which will stimulate scholars to actively produce academic products to meet the demand of practice, thus promote a positive interaction between the academic and the practical circles. The Supreme People's Court may consider formulating certain guidelines on the citation of academic opinions in judicial documents.
全文阅读： 点击下载
