论文部分内容阅读
许多学者认为柯克法官与詹姆斯国王的论争是英国法律专业化历史上的一座里程碑。故事中的国王詹姆斯一世的主张,在一定程度上与当时17世纪初的哲学思维是统一的,似乎显得保守落后;而故事中的法官柯克出于法律思维的主张,似乎显得专业而先进。作为西方法律史上最经典的故事之一,这个故事引申出很多角度的思考,从司法上看,两人分别代表了“普通人司法”与“精英司法”的观念;从法制史上看,两人又代表着“大陆法系”与“英美法系”的区别。本文对此则试从法理学的角度进行分析。
Many scholars believe that the controversy between Judge Kirk and King James is a milestone in the history of British legal specialization. The story of the King James I, to some extent, was philosophical thinking of the early 17th century was unified, seems to be conservative and backward; and the story of the judge Kirk out of legal thinking, seems to be professional and advanced. As one of the most classic stories in the history of Western law, this story leads to many perspectives. Judging from the perspective of judicature, both represent the notion of “common people’s justice” and “elite justice” respectively; from the perspective of legal history Look, they also represent the difference between “civil law ” and “common law ”. This article tries to analyze from the perspective of jurisprudence.