formal rule 中文意思是什麼
formal rule
解釋
形式規則-
The author points that the rule of law in ordinary sense is the rule of formal rational law, complete conception of the rule of law not only contains corresponding " formality " but also corresponding " substance ". it is deficient to divide the conception of the rule of law in " formal " and " substantive " conceptions of the rule of law
通過分析眾多學者對法治問題的論述，認為我們通常所稱的「法治」 -實際是指形式理性法之治，完整的「法治」概念既包括相應的「形式」又包括相應的「實質」 ，將「法治」劃分成形式法治與實質法治不夠妥當， 「實質法治」這一提法本身是有問題的。 -
" substantive " conception of the rule of law per se is questionable. in other words, conception of the rule of law in ordinary sense is " formal " conception of the rule of law. accordingly, " rule of law " in the thesis - - " state intervention governed by the rule of law ", which is only
這樣一來， 「國家干預法治化」中的「法治」就只能解釋為形式理性法之治，但這種形式理性法之治與國家干預實質化的特點是不相吻合的，因此，這一命題遮蔽了國家干預與法治之間潛在的矛盾和沖突， ?簡單套用這一命題並將其作為經濟法的追求目標，並不利於經濟法自身的發展。 -
Dialectical reasoning appears to loss objectivity with the involvement of judges ’ values and this will undoubtedly shaken the foundation of the rule of law. to regain the objectivity of legal reasoning, the article firstly demonstrates the concept and characters of dialectical reasoning in the comparison with formal reasoning, and proves its advantage over formal reasoning. secondly, the writer gives a positive account of dialectical reasoning. the analysis of the nature of reasoning leads to some arguments against the objectivity of dialectical reasoning
因此本文首先將辯證推理與形式推理進行比較，明確辯證推理的概念以及辯證推理觀相對于形式推理觀的優勢，然後通過對各國的法律適用實踐的考察分析辯證推理的思維過程，並以此為基礎檢討辯證推理的客觀性，從三個角度構建辯證推理客觀性的理論基礎，最後提出了在我國法律適用實踐中保障辯證推理客觀性的三條進路，從而使文章具有實踐意義。 -
Third, only the priority of formal justice provides a clear distinction between law and other social rules like morality. fourth, it is the need of the rule of law that the legal formal justice prevails
（二）只有遵循法的形式正義，法才能維護其「合法性」基礎。 （三）只有形式正義優先，才能夠將法與道德倫理等其它社會規范相區別。 -
As one kind of company ’ s laws, the purpose of establishing and running effectively the exceptional exclusion system of the voting rights of corporation lies in to be to controlling shareholder, related shareholder and related director from betraying company voting rights exercising rule improper act in the essence carry on the structure with appropriate system design, in order to correct unbalanced shareholder ’ s interests relationship, realize company voting rights definitely equal to essence equal transformation from a formal one really, and by this with activating the system of the general shareholders meetings and the board of directors, making resolutions of the general shareholders meetings or the board of directors possess legal, just, reasonable and effective foundation of voting rights
作為一種公司法律制度，公司表決權例外排除制度的創建與有效運行，其目的在於以妥當的制度設計對控股股東、關聯股東、關聯董事離叛公司表決權行使規則之內在實質的不當行為進行規制，以矯正失衡的股東利益關系，真正實現公司表決權從形式上的絕對平等向實質上的近乎平等轉化，並藉此以激活股東（大）會制度和董事會制度，使股東（大）會、董事會決議具備合法、公正、合理以及有效的表決權基礎。 -
Law on tortious acts and criminal law together constitute a system for the safeguarding of rights, which is not only the basis for the realization of rights but also constitutes what weber called the " formal rationalization1 required by modern rule of law
「侵權行為法和刑法的規范共同構成一個權利保障的體系，不僅是權利實現的基礎，而且也將形成韋伯所稱的現代法治所要求的『形式合理化』 。 -
And the most serious thing is that the society shows rather calm and is used to the informal credit institution. the damage of formal credit institution focuses on the drug of systems, such as no law to rely on, not relying on the rule of law and denial of justice
而且最嚴重的是社會對非正式信用制度的破壞者顯得相當的冷靜和習以為常，這才是一種最危險的非正式制度；正式信用制度的缺陷主要是法制的滯后，具體表現為「無法可依」 、 「有法不依」與「執法不嚴」 。 -
Are legal conflict between legal essential justice and formal justice an issue that could not be avoided ? is it worthy existing for the rule of lawwhen it does harm to essential legal justice as well as befits people ? should the rule of law follow essential justice or formal justice that may lead to the " true " rule of law ? in order to explore those problems, the thesis aims to make research on legal essential just ice and formal justice, and advocates that legal formal should justice prevails
法的形式正義與實質正義的沖突是法不可迴避的問題嗎；法治在帶給人們利益的同時如何損害著實質的正義，這種損害是否有存在的價值；究竟是形式正義的法還是實質正義的法才是法治之下的法，基於以上原因，本文將探討法的形式正義與實質正義的問題，且立論於法的形式正義應該優先於法的實質正義。 -
Changes in the formal rules include legislative changes, such as the passage of a new statute, judicial changes that result from court decisions altering the common law, regulatory rule changes, which alter the rules by which other rules are made
正是規則的變化包括法律的變化，比如通過了一項新的法令，司法的變化來自於法庭的決定，那改變了普通法，管理規則的變化改變了其他由此而定的規則。 -
Changes in the formal rules may come about as a result of legislative changes such as the passage of a new statute ; judicial changes stemming from court decisions that alter the common law ; regulatory rule changes enacted by regulatory agencies ; and constitutional rule changes that alter the rules by which other rules are made
正式規則的變化可能是法律變化的結果，比如通過了一項新的法令；司法的變化源自於法庭的決定，那將改變普通法；管理規則的變化由管理機構實施；憲法規則的變化會制定其他規則。
分享友人