substantive justice 中文意思是什麼

substantive justice 解釋
實體主義
  • substantive : adj 1 實體的；真實的。2 獨立的，自立的。3 堅固的；實質的；本質的。4 【語法】實詞的，名詞的；表示...
  • justice : n 1 正義，公道；公正，公平。2 正確；妥當，確實。3 正當（理由），合法。4 審判，司法。5 審判員，法...
  1. Discursive consensus : postmetaphysical criterion of substantive justice liujingdong

    后形而上學社會的實質正義標準
  2. In its resolution 58 / 138 of 22 december 2003, the general assembly encouraged governments to undertake preparations for the eleventh congress at an early stage by all appropriate means, including, where appropriate, the establishment of national preparatory committees, with a view to contributing to a focused and productive discussion on the topics and to participating actively in the organization of and follow - up to the workshops ; reiterated its invitation to member states to be represented at the eleventh congress at the highest possible level, for example, by heads of state or government or government ministers and attorneys general, to make statements on the theme and topics of the congress and to participate in thematic interactive round tables ; and urged the regional preparatory meetings to examine the substantive items on the agenda and the workshop topics of the eleventh congress and to make action - oriented recommendations to serve as a basis for the draft recommendations and conclusions for consideration by the eleventh congress and the commission on crime prevention and criminal justice at its fourteenth session

    大會在其2003年12月22日第58 / 138號決議中，鼓勵各國政府及早以一切適當方法籌備第十一屆預防犯罪大會，包括酌情設立國家籌備委員會，以便對重點突出和成效明顯的專題討論作出貢獻，並積極參加講習班的組織及后續工作；重申請會員國指派盡可能高級別的代表，如國家元首或政府首腦或政府部長和司法部長出席第十一屆預防犯罪大會，就預防犯罪大會主題和專題發言並參加專題性意見交流圓桌會議；敦促各區域籌備會議審查第十一屆預防犯罪大會的實質性議程項目和講習班主題並提出著眼於行動的建議，以此作為供預防犯罪大會及委員會第十四屆會議審議的建議和結論草案的基礎。
  3. The precondition of studying the distribution of burden of proof in civil lawsuit is to correctly set theoretical definitions for burden of proof as well as the object of burden of proof. going through various viewpoints upon the distribution of burden of proof, they, guided by the substantive law and the principle of justice and fairness, have respective limitations, they strive for the predictability and stability of law, but unavoidably face the problem of little flexibility, which might make the results not so fair, the substantive standards highlight a great flexibility, but might cause careless judge due to the uncertainty of standards

    綜觀證明責任分配諸說，雖均以符合實體法宗旨與公平正義原則為指導思想，但各有其局限，形式性標準致力於實現法的可預測性與穩定性，但卻不可避免地存在靈活性不足的問題，可能使證明責任負擔的結果有欠公平，實質性標準實現了靈活性的長處，卻又存在因標準不確定導致法官恣意裁判危及正義的可能。
  4. And then chapter makes an analysis of the second substantive criterion of the procedural safeguard purpose which is based on the history of dispute settlement and theory of justice, the maximin rule founded by john rawls. chapter is about the positivist substantive criterion in accordance with the developing of social status

    其次，以羅爾斯的「社會正義理論」和「最大最小原則」為理論基礎，以糾紛解決方式的發展史為事實基礎論證了程序保障目的論的合理性，分析了實質標準之二? ?民事訴訟的目的。
  5. Part3, the author studies the morality of market economy specifically. analyzing several typical viewpoints of distributive justice : rawls " substantive justice, nozick ' s procedural ( right ) justice. hayek ' s rules ( procedural ) justice - a natural order, communitarianism ' s viewpoints of distributive justice, habermas " " procedural justice " and confucian ' s hierarchical justice, the author argues that we should pay more attention to the distributive justice theories of rawls and communitarians, and weaken the influence of confucian tradition and try to find a procedure agreeing with justice and its steps

    筆者首先考察了幾種典型的分配正義觀點：羅爾斯實質正義的分配正義觀、諾齊克程序（權利）正義的分配正義觀、哈耶克規則（程序）正義的自發秩序觀、 「社群主義」的分配正義觀、哈貝馬斯的「程序的正義」觀以及先秦儒家的「禮義差等」的分配正義觀，接著提出我們主要以羅爾斯和「社五包b飛石6臣ik個于wniasfur 』 si 」 iiesis群主義」理論為主要參考，盡量弱化傳統的不利影響，尋求一個合乎正義的程序及正義程序執行步驟。
  6. But, we should pay atten tion : when we are faced with that the procedural justice and the substantive justice ca n ' t be inconsistent, we should choose giving up the substantive justice of one case in order to ensure procedural justice, so we can gain substantive justice for more case

    然而我們必須注意，當我們面臨程序正義與實體正義不能一致時，我們就要選擇犧牲個案的實體公正來保全程序的公正，這樣換來更多案件的實體公正。影響刑事訴訟程序正義有許多因素。
  7. However, considering that practical lives are always complicated and changable, special rules and regulations, such as " the principle of changed circumstance in the performance of contracf ' in the continental legal system, frustration of purpose of contract in the anglo - american law and various systems concerning rescission and termination of contract, are established for social substantive justice, balancing the benefits of parties of contract. generally speaking, institution of contract rescission equally vests both parties with the right to discharge a contract

    然現實生活紛繁復雜、變動不居，在契約關系中，為求得社會妥當性即具體個案的實質正義，法律創設了相應的原則和制度作針對性之調節，諸如大陸法系民法所謂「情勢變更原則」 、英美法系所謂「合同落空」制度以及各具特色的合同解除及合同終止制度，以期收到平衡契約雙方當事人利益之效。
  8. The lawyer ' s right of criminal suit is of obvious effect on the procedural and substantive justice

    在程序和實體上，律師刑事訴訟權利對司法公正的意義則是顯著的。
  9. In a society ruled by law, lawyers play an important role in helping the judicial organs to adjudicate, achieving procedural justice and substantive justice, exercising adjudication, safeguarding judicial justice

    摘要在法治社會中，律師在配合司法機關作出裁判，實現程序公正和實體公正，以及在監督法官正當行使裁判權，確保司法廉潔和公正方面發揮著重要作用。
  10. Such circumstances show : it violates procedural justice of proceedings, it is not beneficial to the protection for substantive rights of parties, it violates the principle of equity of parties in civil proceedings, the parties " right of choice for procedures has been improperly limited, procedural efficiency is rather low due to the bad operability of legislative techniques

    具體表現在：既有違訴訟程序正義又不利於當事人實體權利的保護，違背了民事訴訟當事人地位平等的原則，當事人的程序選擇權受到不當限制，立法的可操作性差導致訴訟效率低下等。
  11. From the historical perspective, in order to pursue the maximum substantive justice, criminal retrial has been given much importance in china all the time. however, the western countries have the tradition to maintain the " res judicata " judgments

    從歷史的發展沿革來看，為追求最大限度的實體公正，刑事再審在我國歷來受到重視，而西方各國則素有維護生效裁判既判效力的歷史傳統。
  12. On the relations between substantive justice and procedural justice

    論實體正義與程序正義的關系
  13. Relationship between substantive justice and procedural justice in our criminal litigation

    論我國刑事訴訟中實體公正與程序公正之關系
  14. Rawls classified the justice into the substantive justice, the formal justice, and the procedural justice

    羅爾斯把正義分為實質正義、形式正義和程序正義。
  15. Judicial justice is embodied in substantive justice and procedure justice. but the relation of them is in dispute

    司法公正是通過實體公正和程序公正實現的，對于實體公正和程序公正的關系，眾說紛紜。
  16. For a long time, justice has been regarded almost as the only value of law in view of traditional philosophy of law, and procedural justice has been given more attention, since it can ensure the fulfillment of substantive justice at most

    在傳統法哲學中，正義幾乎一直被視為法律的唯一價值，而程序正義因其最可能保證實質正義的實現而倍受現代人們的青睞。
  17. If the fact that its judgment asserts or applicable law has mistakes, and we cannot allow correcting it absolutely, that won ’ t accord with justice. besides, pursuing substantive justice is the final objective of the criminal procedure

    然而其裁判所認定的事實或者適用的法律有錯誤，若絕對不許糾正，則又與正義有背，且發現實體的真實，本屬于刑事訴訟之最終目的。
  18. Justice equals to the rationality of distribution, while the rationality of distribution result is substantive justice and that of methods and process of distribution is procedural justice, which is not only the sole path to substantive justice, but also the criterion to judge the justice of the substantive result

    正義是分配的合理性，分配結果的合理性是實體正義，分配方式、過程的合理性是程序正義，程序正義不僅是實體正義實現的唯一途徑，而且是評判實體結果是否正義的標準，因此，民事抗訴制度監督的對象是審判程序。
分享友人
分享到 Line

分享到臉書