论文部分内容阅读
利益衡量理论指出,法官裁判中存在实质性判断且也应该进行利益衡量,但它却未能对如何进行实质裁量提供有效的标准与知识。相关标准或理论不但不具有可操作性,且遮蔽了问题的本原,容易使法官陷入“左右为难”的困境,做出错误的选择。与之相对,经济分析理论却有助于帮助法官将实质裁量的依据集中到不同选择的一般性社会后果上,且为后果的预测及评价提供了更为有效的知识与标准。
The theory of interest measurement points out that there are substantive judgments in judging judges and should also weigh the benefits, but it fails to provide effective standards and knowledge on how to make substantive judgments. Relevant standards or theories not only do not have maneuverability, and cover up the root of the problem, it is easy for the judge to fall into the predicament of “dilemma” and make the wrong choice. In contrast, economic analysis theory helps to help judges focus their substantive discretion on the general social consequences of different choices and provides more effective knowledge and standards for the prediction and evaluation of consequences.