将经济法诉讼纳入公益诉讼的法律思考

本文主要针对目前我国经济法没有自己独立的诉讼制度的现状,简要介绍了公益诉讼的概念、发展历史、在我国的状况以及将经济法诉讼纳入公益诉讼后的经济公益诉讼进行了简要的介绍和初步的探讨。     

对物诉讼可以休矣

对物诉讼是针对物提起的一种诉讼制度,具体指在合法程序下,法院因申请人之请求,通过扣压被申请人的船舶或其它财产,继而将扣压物拍卖,以拍卖所得金额为限偿付债务的过程.这一理论将船舶或其它财产当作一个法律实体,与物主相分离.所以最后执行对物诉讼的判决时,也只能以此物的价值为限.这一理论起源于英国,但之后发生了重大的变化.在现代英国法律下,对物诉讼开始后,如果物主参加诉讼,那么,对物诉讼将转变为对人诉讼.现代英国法律认为,对物诉讼可作为一种程序上的手段迫使物主出庭,而不一味将船舶作为法律实体看待.近来英国上诉院的许多做法表明,英国日益意识到自己是欧共体的一员,所以在对物诉讼观点上离美国越来越远.     

船舶油污公约适用背景下环境民事公益诉讼问题研究

念及国际海洋环境公共利益,保持和促进航运贸易发展,在船舶油污公约的适用背景下,国内一般的环境公益诉讼与海洋环境诉讼不同。国内环境民事公益诉讼采取“责任限制”赔偿体系,海洋环境民事公益诉讼需要与私益诉讼合并审理,并在同一个责任限制基金内受偿。因此,在法律适用、管辖和主题等方面,与一般环境民事公益诉讼存在较为显著的差异。本文立足于前述公约适用的背景下,探讨相关问题,以解决现实中的司法问题。     

多式联运讲座（19）——第十一讲 对第三方的直接诉讼

概括地说,关于解决共存诉讼的方法主要有三种:其一是承认或禁止侵权诉讼;其二是对第三方进行合同诉讼;其三是受合同免责条款限制的侵权诉讼。就第一种解决共存诉讼的方法而言,大陆法系的比利时认为受雇于承运人的雇佣人员或独立合同的转包承运人代理承运人履行全部或部分合同时     

从管辖原则看涉外海事诉讼

确立涉外海事诉讼 管辖原则的重要性 涉外海事诉讼的管辖权是指一国根据国内法和本国缔结、参加的国际条约的规定,对某一海事诉讼行使审判权的资格.     

我国海事特别诉讼中建立对物诉讼制度初探

文章通过借鉴英美法系中对物诉讼制度,结合《1999年扣船公约》以及我国民事诉讼和海事诉讼程序理论和实践,系统分析和论证了我国海事请求保全制度中对物诉讼的特点。针对我国对物诉讼制度的建立提出了全新的大胆构想,以期完整理解和准确实施海事请求及海事请求保全制度,从而进一步推动我国海事诉讼的发展。     

国际海事关联诉讼解决机制

对于国际海事关联诉讼问题的解决,目前在国际社会中存在三种值得借鉴的做法,即运用不方便法院原则拒绝管辖、规定先受理法院管辖权规则、关联诉讼的合并审理规则。中国目前还没有关于解决海事关联诉讼的明文立法,基于国际海事关联诉讼解决的迫切性,在中国构建国际海事关联诉讼解决机制可以适当采纳不方便法院原则,在立法中规定先受理法院管辖原则以及海事关联诉讼的合并管辖规则。     

海事诉讼中的对物诉讼制度

基于国际经济一体化的发展使海事诉讼的国际趋同化趋势越来越强的现状,分析我国海事法律在诉讼主体、船舶扣押等方面存在的对物诉讼制度的明显痕迹,阐述对物诉讼制度的历史渊源和理论基础,并借鉴该制度在英美法系国家海事司法实践中适用的经验,提出将这种诉讼制度运用到我国的海事诉讼中,对于解决目前我国海事对人诉讼中存在的问题具有积极的意义。     

我国海事诉讼管辖权探讨

诉讼管辖权是指确定法院间受理第一审案件的分工和权限，《中华人民共和国海事诉讼特别程序法》规定了海事法院的诉讼管辖权，包括地域管辖、专属管辖和协议管辖，《海事诉讼特别程序法》与民事诉讼法相比，已明确并扩大了海事法院的管辖权。以下分别对其地域管辖、专属管辖和协议管辖进行分析：     

谈谈涉外海事诉讼管辖的有关问题(上)

涉外海事诉讼管辖,是海事国际私法的一个重要组成部分。所谓涉外海事诉讼的管辖权,亦称审判权,是指一国法院有权审理涉外海事案件的范围和依据。管辖权的实施不仅直接关系到案件的审理结果,更重要的是还涉及国家主权问题。我国是当今世界的航运大国,海洋运输是沟通对外经济贸易繁荣发展的重要纽带。在中国即将加入ＷＴＯ的情况下,涉外海事案件也会日益增多;因此认真研究,不断有效行使涉外海事诉讼管辖权显得尤为重要。 本文拟从涉外海事诉讼的管辖原则和涉外海事诉讼管辖权和国家主权两个方面加以分析。 一、涉外海事诉讼的管辖原则…     

ADR在海事争议中的运用

作为一种代替性纠纷解决方法,ADR具有极大的灵活性和适应性,可以有效地对诉讼进行补充,在海事争议中主要表现为和解、调解和仲裁,与诉讼程序可以相互衔接。     

Public law litigation and marine affairs: The boldt decision

Abstract

The management and conservation of the marine environment and its natural resources are increasingly understood to be issues of public policy with consequences for society at large. On a variety of dramatic occasions over the last decades, the federal judiciary has departed from its traditionally passive role in the shaping of social policy. This paper examines a critical marine controversy, the Boldt Decision (U.S. v. Washington 1974), to illustrate and evaluate nontraditional judicial behavior. The first two sections introduce Indian‐United States treaties concerning Pacific Northwest salmon resources, and the unfolding of the Boldt Decision. A third section argues that a “public law”; model of litigation fits the legal events of the Boldt Decision. A fourth section addresses the competence of the Boldt court as it is manifest in judicial organization, analysis, and implementation. A final section comments on the potential for public law litigation elsewhere in the governing of marine affairs.     

The dredging dilemma: Economic development and environmental protection in Oakland Harbor

Abstract

Seaport expansion often generates tensions between the national interest in efficient transport and local interests in water quality and habitat preservation. The governing American permitting system, however, establishes an extraordinarily cumbersome, legalistic, and costly method for balancing environmental and economic considerations. A case study of the Port of Oakland illustrates the tendency. For four years, plans to find an environmentally acceptable site for dredged material have been stymied by a sequence of inconclusive regulatory and judicial proceedings. Meanwhile, large container ships can enter and leave Oakland harbor only at high tide, and not fully loaded. Despite the absence of any authoritative determination concerning environmental risks, the port was compelled to accede to progressively more expensive disposal methods. Such “adversarial legalism”; is not unique to the Oakland harbor case, but recurs in other policy spheres. It stems from a governmental structure that fragments decision‐making power among many agencies, that constrains regulatory discretion with legal demands for scientific certainty, and that by allowing agency decisions to be challenged readily in court, encourages legalistic defensiveness and extortion rather than compromise. The article concludes with a discussion of the conditions under which regional planning bodies might overcome these centrifugal tendencies.     

试论水上交通事故责任认定的不可诉性

对水上交通事故责任认定不服,是否可以提起行政复议或者行政诉讼这一问题,在海事管理机构内部一直持有不同的观点。文章通过对法学的理解,分析了水上交通事故责任认定的特点、行政行为的法理分类和司法判例等诸多方面,提出不服水上交通事故责任认定不宜通过行政诉讼途径解决的观点。     

新《行政诉讼法》施行带给海事管理的思考

文中立足于新《行政诉讼法》的施行,深入解读法条修订的理念和亮点,从海事执法者的角度,对新法施行带来的变化和挑战进行思考,提出调整、规范执法行为的具体对策。     

Judicial Interpretations of Federal Consistency under the Coastal Zone Management Act

The federal consistency provision of the Coastal Zone Management Act (1972) created a new form of interaction between federal and state governments. The implementation of this provision has significant ramifications for coastal management and intergovernmental cooperation in the United States. Past studies have focused on the provision's implementation patterns among U.S. coastal states and federal-state disputes mediated by the Secretary of Commerce. This supplemental article examines judicial interpretations of the federal consistency provision over the past two decades in relation to major issues deliberated by Congress at the time of enactment. Recent changes in the provision, as well as those unresolved issues likely to resurface in future litigation, are also discussed. Seemingly, coastal land use authority and offshore energy exploration remain the most contentious issues surrounding the federal consistency provision.     

On a clear day in Ogunquit,Maine

Abstract

Winning a court case against a federal agency may seem to be the sweetest success for an environmental group, but losing litigation is not total failure. In the case of Ogunquit Village Corporation et al., vs. R. M. Davis the plaintiff lost the legal skirmish against the Soil Conservation Service, but in doing so significantly aided the struggle within the agency to implement more environmentally sensitive planning and engineering procedures. This paper describes the court case in terms of the Soil Conservation Service's procedural and policy responses including the agency's modus operandi and the internal paths/pitfalls involved with the implementation of visual resource management. The author also speculates as to the visual resource understanding of the evidence presented by the plaintiff and a possible but unstated visual basis for the original complaint.     

Shipwrecks: The past in the present

Abstract

Historic shipwrecks are a recently recognized group of historic resources. These shipwrecks attract sport divers, archeologists, and treasure hunters. States have always claimed the historic shipwrecks embedded in their submerged lands. States manage these resources as part of their historic preservation programs. However, since 1981, state authority has been challenged by the federal court sitting in admiralty. Cases have been decided in Florida, Massachusetts, Maryland, Texas, and Georgia; however, only one Florida case went against the states but the expensive litigation has been a drain on state treasuries.

Bills currently before the U.S. Congress will affirm state title and encourage states to put effort into state programs for historic shipwrecks. This article briefly describes the populations interested in shipwrecks, current case law, state law and state programs, and finally the federal legislative proposal.     

航运纠纷中诉讼程序当事人不到庭的处理规则

随着我国海洋运输业和航运服务业的迅速发展,航海运输中的各种纠纷正呈逐年上升趋势,其中不乏海事行政诉讼案件.在海事行政诉讼案件中,当事人因为各种原因,有时会拒绝参与诉讼程序,特别是不到庭参加诉讼,这会对海事行政诉讼案件的恰当处理带来不利影响.此种情形下,海事法院应当从合法性和合理性两方面出发,结合法律规定及具体情形,对航运纠纷中海事行政诉讼当事人不到庭的理由作出正当性判断,并据此适用不同的处理规则,以确保海事行政纠纷得到妥善解决.     

浅析船舶避碰中的“背离行为”

本文针对船舶避碰中的“背离行为”，根据《１９７２年国际海上避碰规则》第二条“责任”，对“背离行为”的法律性质、条件、时机及其应遵循的原则作了系统的分析；并对“责任条款”提出修改意见。