摘要
后果主义裁判方法通过考察判决结果可能造成的后果来反推何种裁判是更可欲的,这种与传统法教义学迥异的证成方法,引起了学界对其在裁判客观性、正当性、权利保护等方面的质疑。但从实际法条适用和案例裁判的角度来看,以“异质异价”类格式条款有效性问题为例,后果主义法律方法通过吸纳其他社会科学的知识,依靠普遍经验事实而非朴素价值观进行决策,反而能克服法教义学法律方法在疑难案件中说理空洞、难以形成共识的不足。因此,对后果主义裁判方法的一些质疑是不能成立的,后果主义论辩在揭示判决实质理由以及增强裁判客观性、说服力方面有其独特的价值和优势。司法实践应当大胆地接受和运用后果主义裁判方法,并在应用中谋求对该论证方法的精进和优化。
Faced with some criticisms of the consequence-oriented judicial adjudication in terms of objectivity,legitimacy,and protection of rights,this article takes the issue of“the validity of certain standard terms”as an example to test whether these criticisms really reflect the true appearance of doctrinal reasoning and consequentialist reasoning in legal application,from the perspective of actual application of law and judicial adjudication.Based on the practical test,this article responds to those criticisms,and points out the value of the consequentialist argument in revealing those substantive reasons which are decisive to verdict and enhancing the objectivity and persuasiveness of the judgment.Hence the judicial practice ought to be daring to accept and apply the consequence-oriented legal method,and seek refinement and optimization of the method in the application.
出处
《中山大学法律评论》
2022年第1期70-97,共28页
Sun Yatsen University Law Review
关键词
后果主义裁判方法
法律方法
法教义学方法
格式条款有效性
Consequentialist Judgment Method
Legal Method
Legal Dogmatics
The Validity of Standard Terms
作者简介
蒋晓雨,复旦大学法学院硕士研究生,研究领域为法理学
