普通法类比推理(reasoning by analogy)作为一种源远流长的裁判方法,长期以来不能免于司法界内外的质疑和批评,这与普通法类比推理是否存在相似性标准密不可分。也就是说,来源案件(source case)与目标案件(target case)是否需要满足一定的标准,才能具有“足够的”相似性,可以让普通法法官类比地适用来源案件所含的法律规则,对目标案 As a long-established referee method, the reasoning by analogy has not been able to avoid being questioned and criticized both within and outside the judiciary for a long time. This is closely related to the existence of similarity standards in common law analogical reasoning. In other words, whether the source case and the target case need to meet certain criteria can be sufficiently similar to allow the common law judge to apply the legal rules contained in the source case analogously , On the target case