您的位置: 新闻中心>通知公告

通知公告


第九届“全国财经高校法学教育论坛”会议通知


尊敬的各财经高校法学院负责人:

进一步贯彻落实党的十八届五中全会提出的五大发展理念,深入贯彻落实习近平总书记中国政法大学考察时重要讲话精神,荣中国财经法学教育和理论研究,创新财经法治人才培养机制,对外经济贸易大学法学院将于20171021在北京召开第九届全国财经高校法学教育论坛。会议期间举行通商杯全国财经高校法律职业技能大赛。我们诚挚地邀请您在百忙之中出席此次中国财经法学教育的年度会议,并组织学生参与大赛征文本会议通知和所有附件的WORD版本均可在对外经济贸易大学法学院官网首页下载。

一、会议时间和地点

会议时间:20171021

会议地点:对外经济贸易大学法学院

二、举办单位

主办单位:中国法学教育研究会法学特色专业建设委员会(财经类院校)

承办单位:对外经济贸易大学法学院

三、会议主题

财经法治人才培养的新模式与新挑战

四、参会论文与学生征文提交

请各位参会代表围绕会议主题撰写参会论文组织全国财经高校法律职业技能大赛学生征文材料请将参会论文及学生征文929前以Word形式发送至电子邮箱UIBE20171014@aliyun.com,以便会务组编印会议论文集和安排学生征文评审。为方便编辑和排版,论文撰写请遵循统一的格式要求,格式规范详见附件2学生征文要求与说明详见附件3

五、会务费用

与会各位老师免收会务费,往返交通费、会议期间住宿费自理。

每所高校安排研究生1人、本科生2人参加本次会议,往返交通费自理,会议期间住宿费由我院解决。请以学校为单位,在会议回执中说明参会老师和学生人数,以及住宿时间和要求

六、报到时间和地点

京外与会人员请于2017102016点以后,北京市朝阳区惠新东街19惠侨饭店(对外经济贸易大学西门对面)一楼大厅会务组接待处报到,1021日会议一天京内与会人员请于1021日上午直接在会场报到。会议地点和议程安排届时通知。

七、会议联系

请参会人员务必于929前将会议回执(见附件1)以电子邮件形式发至UIBE20171014@aliyun.com邮箱届时会务人员与各位老师确认。

会务联系人:

王淼(博士研究生):15210931968        冯辉:13581684774

通讯地址:北京市朝阳区惠新东10号对外经济贸易大学法学院。邮政编码:100029

 

对外经济贸易大学法学院

201776

 


附件1:会议回执


单位名称

 

电子邮箱

 

邮编

 

详细地址

 

教师及学生参会人员名单

姓名

性别

职务/职称

固定电话

手机

电子邮箱

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

住宿要求

10月20日标准间___间  单人间___间

10月21日标准间___间  单人间___间

提交论文或发言题目

1、

2、

3、

备注:请与会老师务必于929前将会议回执发至电子邮箱UIBE20171014@aliyun.com

 


附件2:参会论文格式要求

 

一、标题请用小三宋体、加粗、居中。正文请用小四宋体、行距22。文中各级标题请用小四宋体、加粗、居中,格式请以“一、”、“(一)”、“1.”等排列。论文首页请以脚注形式附上作者简介。除正文外,请附300字以内的中文摘要和3至5个关键词,关键词之间请用分号隔开。

二、文中注释一律采用脚注,请选择“每页重新编号”,样式为:①②③等,脚注的数字符号与脚注内容之间请不留空格。

三、非直接引用原文时,注释前加“参见”,引用非原始资料时,请注明“转引自”。

四、请规范数字用法,凡用阿拉伯数字并无不妥的就不用汉字表示数字;非直接引用法条的序号请用阿拉伯数字(包括正文)。

五、具体注释范例:

1、著作、教材类:

①《马克思恩格斯选集》第4卷,人民出版社1972年版,第24页。

祥瑞:《比较宪法与行政法》,法律出版社1985年版,第255页。

③佟柔主编:《中国民法》,法律出版社1990年版,第67页。

大同:《国际贸易法》,北京大学出版社2002年版,第4—6页。

2、论文类:①苏永钦:《私法自治中的国家强制》,载《中外法学》2001年第1期,第93页。

3、文集类:祥瑞:《比较宪法学的研究方法》,载《宪法比较研究论文集》(),南京大学出版社1993年版,第55页。

4、译作类: [古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1983年版,第54页。

5、报纸类:①张志铭:《现代化与中国律师制度的发展》,载《光明日报》2003年9月23日。

6、古籍类: [清]沈家本:《沈寄簃先生遗书》甲编,第43卷。

7、辞书类:①《新英汉法律词典》,法律出版社1998年版,第24页。

8、网络资料类:①郑成思:《“入世”、知识产权保护与民商法的现代化》,载中国法学网http://www.iolaw.org.cn/showNews.asp?id=243,2007年4月29日访问。

9、英文类: L. Fuller, The Morality of Law, revised edition, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969, p.143.

 See Roscoe Pound, The Spirit of the Common Law, New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1999, pp.179-180.

 I. Seidl-Hohenveldern,International Economic Law,2nd ed.,Dordrecht: MartinusNijhoff Publishers, 1992, p.125.

 Joseph Raz, “Legal Principles and The Limits of Law”, 81 Yale Law Journal(1972), p.839.

 H.L.A.Hart, “Jhering’s Heaven of Concepts and Modern Analytical Jurisprudence”, in Essays in Jurisprudence and Philosophy, London: Oxford University Press, 1983, pp.269-270.

10、英文以外的外文文种:依照该文种习惯。

 

附件3通商杯全国财经高校法律职业技能大赛征文

 

本次法律职业技能大赛继续采取撰写法律文书的形式,分为中文案例组(中文撰写)和英文案例组(英文撰写)。请参赛同学从下列案例中任选一个中文或英文案例,根据材料和要求撰写相应的法律文书。字数不限,重点考察表达准确与格式规范。请在征文投稿中写明案例序号。论坛组委会将对来稿进行评审并颁发获奖证书。

 

(一)中文案例一

1.材料

2001年,被告钱某与原告高某协商一致,钱某因没有购买经济适用房的资格,故此以高某的名义购买了位于北京市昌平区天通苑某区1号楼2单元301室的经济适用房一套。同年329日,钱某又以高某(借款人)的名义向银行贷款22万元,用于购买上述房屋。虽然房屋产权人登记为高某,但高某未支付购房的任何费用。房屋交付后,钱某在该房内一直居住。2012年因钱某与高某生意产生纠纷,之后高某向法院提出诉讼,要求钱某向其腾退该诉争房屋。

钱某辩称自己与高某协商一致以高某的名义购买。购房所有费用及多年物业费均系其支付,自己实际居住该房至今,自己系诉争房产的真正所有权人。钱某并提出反诉,称自己与高某之间构成委托管理,虽然购房相关手续均是以高某的名义办理,且高某是诉争房屋名义上的所有权人,但根据本案事实可以确定,高某并非实际购房人,要求判令高某将诉争房屋办理变更登记、过户至反诉人名下。

北京昌平区人民法院一审判决该房屋的所有权归钱某。高某不服提起上诉。

2.要求

请作为上诉人高某的律师起草一份上诉状

 

(二)中文案例二

1.材料

20161027日晚上10点左右,家住北京市朝阳区的张丽通过滴滴打车软件叫快车,这一单被司机刘某所接半个小时后,当车辆行驶到顺义区京承高速出口方向28公里处时,一辆货车迎面快速驶来,司机为了躲避货车向右打轮,车辆与道路护栏相撞随后翻入路边沟内。凌晨1点左右,急救车赶来将张丽及司机刘某送至怀柔医院治疗。刘某头部有划伤,在医院进行了包扎已无大碍。而张丽头部及身体多处擦伤,因做过隆鼻手术,受伤后鼻部假体歪斜并有头晕症状。随张丽在北京怀柔医院等就医并手术,仅整容费花费4万余元。事后,张丽拨打滴滴公司电话要求赔偿,但仅司机刘某支付过医疗费3000元,滴滴公司未进行赔偿。司机刘某称,他是通过外甥的驾驶证注册的滴滴快车司机,车辆是事发前5天租来的张丽是滴滴快车平台指派给他的第二单业务。事故发生后,张丽通过滴滴平台支付了120元车费。

随后张丽起诉司机刘某、滴滴快车(北京小桔科技有限公司)、首汽租赁有限公司,索赔整容费、精神损失费等共计9万余元,诉华泰财产保险有限公司在承保范围内承担赔偿责任。张丽的代理律师称,张丽是通过滴滴快车平台下单,由滴滴公司指派刘某接单,因此,刘某与滴滴公司存在劳动合同关系,滴滴公司作为雇主应该承担赔偿责任。而首汽公司作为车辆所有人,对涉案车辆未投保车上人员险,故应该承担相应赔偿责任。

2.要求

请选择作为被告人刘某、滴滴快车、首汽租赁有限公司、华泰财产保险有限公司等任意一方当事人的律师,起草一份答辩状。

 

(三)中文案例三

1.材料

被告人牛二因不满羊三与其争夺地板生意,产生杀人恶念。2017328日晚8时许,被告人牛二把雇请的赵某、钱某召到其在四川省成都市的住处,被告孙某、李某受被告人牛二的邀约也一同前往。被告人牛二对赵钱孙李四人说:有个老乡在跟我争夺销售地板生意,这笔生意关系到我一辈子的命运,做不成我就要破产。你们帮我教训他一顿。生意作成了一定给你们好处。随后牛二让赵钱孙李四人听候消息。次日晚8时许,牛二探明了羊三的行踪,即电话告知赵某。赵某约上另外三人,分别携带长刀、菜刀、木工锯、匕首来到牛二住处。牛二说:羊三9点多钟才回来,和他在一起的还有一个人叫马四。他们住在招待所5楼靠厕所边的第一间。羊三至少有四五千元钱,手上有一枚大金戒指和一块手表。你们光是教训他,而且要把羊三整死。赵某问:是不是把他们两个都整死?牛二说:就是要把他们两个都杀死,留一个麻烦就大了。牛二绘制了羊三住处示意图,并提醒赵某等人:马四年轻身高,又练过武,你们进屋先杀马四,再用刀逼着羊三把钱和证件交出来,将金戒指和手表拿走,然后把他也杀死。当晚930分左右,牛二核实了羊三、马四的行踪之后,便指使赵某等人前往下手。赵某等四人当即携带作案工具窜到招待所羊三的住处,伺机作案。钱某以谈地板生意为名进入羊三房间,得知羊三当晚要离成回闽。赵钱等四人见羊三住处人多,没敢下手,便在小楼商量伺机下手。当晚10时许,赵某等四人尾随羊三同乘上一辆中巴汽车。当车行至渡金线900米处,李某在赵某的授意下,走到羊三座位前盘问,然后站起来喊道:赵哥,他就是羊三。赵钱等人即叫司机停车,强行将羊三拖下车,挟持到公路左侧的金沙江边沙滩上。羊三大声申辩、求情,李某对羊三进行殴打。赵某从羊三身上抢走人民币1080元、金戒指一枚(价值1869元),劳力士自动日历镀金手表一块(价值250元),又强迫羊三打开密码箱,将箱的工作证、身份证、证明、名片、电动剃须刀、玉佩等抢走。羊三再次求饶,赵某叫孙某持刀看住羊三,并与钱某、李某商量将羊三杀死。赵某假称答应放羊三,叫钱、孙二人用羊三的衣物将其眼、嘴堵死,将手、脚捆住,并将羊三推倒仰卧。钱某用菜刀朝羊三的脖部猛砍一刀,又用长刀刺了其腹部两下。羊三再次哀求,赵某手持木工锯锯羊三的颈部。随后,四人用沙土将羊三掩埋,并搬了七块石头压在上面,将羊三的密码箱埋在沙滩里,赵某将木工抛入金沙江。随后,四人逃离现场。

2017330日上午,赵某、钱某将杀死羊三的情况告知牛二,牛二表示感谢,许诺给3万元酬金。331日,赵某、钱某在牛二的授意下逃离成都市42日,孙某、李某亦外逃。被告人李某慑于法律的威力,外逃中托人带信给成都市公安局,担白交待了参与抢劫、杀死羊三的犯罪事实,为破获本案和及时抓获犯罪嫌疑人起到了重大作用。201749日,牛二等五被告人先后被抓获归案。

2.要求

请作为本案的公诉人,根据本案案情起草一份起诉书

 

(四)中文案例四

1.材料

被告人张三,男,1982420日出生,大学文化,无业。201054日,被告人张三通过房屋中介相中了李四的房子,随即通过中介与李四达成协议,约定以300万元的总价购买李四位于南京市秦淮区曙光里90号的房产。张三事先与其兄弟张小三串通好,声称自己与兄弟张小三患难与共,情深意重,将为其兄弟张小三置办新房。同年513日,遂以张小三的名义与李四签订了存量房买卖合同。张三先支付了60万元的购房首付款,谎称向银行贷款支付购房余款。李四由于老母生病,急需用钱治病,在拿到60万首付款之后并未审查张三与银行的贷款合同,当即与张三签订了合同并办理了房产过户手续。在二手房买卖中,对于以银行贷款方式支付购房尾款的二手房买卖,买方在产权变更后、房款尚未完全支付前就可获得新的产权证。因此,该房产被过户到张小三名下之后,张三随即取得了新的产权证。而事实上张三并未向银行提出贷款申请,为防李四要求看贷款合同,张三伪造了一份贷款合同并自行刻制了银行公章。由于李四未提出审查贷款合同的要求,这份伪造的贷款合同也未被出示

随后,张三用该房产向王五抵押借款170万元,声称用来做一笔瓷砖生意。事实上,这笔借款有一部分用来还房款,剩下的张三恣意挥霍。最终因无法偿还王五的借款,张三又将该房产抵押给赵六,向赵六借款200万元,用于偿还王五的借款。至案发,李四尚有售房款140万元未能收回,而赵六的200万也是分文未还。

2.要求

请作为本案公诉人,根据案情起草一份起诉书

 

(五)英文案例一

1. Material

Buyer v. Seller

[Buyer] is domiciled in Austria. [Buyer] produces stainless-steel sheet metal, which it then delivers to its customers for further processing. For protection against damage during transport and processing, the metal is covered with self-adhesive foil that must be fully removed after processing.

The [buyer] has had a business relationship for several years with the [seller], who is based in Germany. The [buyer] had in the past repeatedly obtained this type of protective foil from the [seller] without complaint.

In March 2005, the [buyer] again ordered 7,500 square meters of foil from the [seller], which was delivered on 28 March 2005. According to the contracts, the [buyer] should give the notice to the [seller] on any defect of the goods no later than 8 days after the goods are received.

The [buyer] inspected the delivery for completeness and exterior imperfections but did not test it. Thereafter the [buyer] used the foil for, among other things, a section of polished stainless steel sheet metal, which it then delivered to its customer, Company B.

On 20 April 2005 Company B informed the [buyer] that after stripping off the foilthe complete adhesive residue stuck like an adhesive film on the polished surface. As a result, the [buyer] notified the [seller] on 21 April 2005 of the contract non-conformity.

Company B cleaned the stainless-steel surface at a total expense of $492,240, which the [buyer] then reimbursed. The [seller], after inspecting the defect for itself, agreed with the [buyer]'s notice of defect. To respond to [buyer]’s complaint, the [seller] replied in fax on 29 April 2005 that we will only consider the legitimate complaints based on our breach of contract”. Thereafter, the [buyer] and the [seller] sought in vain to come to an agreement concerning the settlement of damages. The [seller] arranged a meeting with [buyer] on 20 May 2005, and offered to reimburse the [buyer]'s cleaning costs of $16,500, through the free delivery of 30,000 square meters of protective foil with rubber adhesive. By letter from its legal counsel dated 22 May 2005, the [seller] proposed the amount of $200,000, one half in cash payment, the other half in performance of deliveries.

Thereafter, the negotiation did not work out, [seller] rejected the amount claimed by the [buyer] as reimbursement for the sum of $492,240, that it had paid to its customer, which the [seller] thought as excessive. In the present proceedings, the [buyer] demands reimbursement from the [seller] for the amount of $492,240, which [buyer] paid as compensation to Company B.

CISG is the applicable law.

2. Requirement

If you are the legal counsel for the seller, write a memorandum to defend against the buyer. Please write in English.

Issues need to be discussed:

1What is the effect of the sellers fax on 29 April 2005?

2Whether the sellers participation of negotiation over the lack of conformity of the goods can be regarded as a waiver on the delay of buyers notice of unconformity of the goods?

3Is there any other conduct of the seller can be regarded as a waiver on the delay of buyers notice of unconformity of the goods?

4What is the legal standard to determine whether the conduct of one contracting party may be regarded as a waiver of rights on the contracts or CISG?

 

(六)英文案例二

1. Material

Dola has a long history of social unrest due to political and religious tensions. The nation is predominantly comprised of two religious groups, 30% Yo and 70% Zo. The Yo minority had long accused the Zo-led government of systematic discrimination, triggering frequent protests and clashes.

On February 15, 2016, violence occurred during one protest and resulted in the death of a protester. On June 6, 2016, the announcement of election came out followed by a relative calm in domestic society.

Restrictions on elections-related speech to prevent public disorder as relevant in the Election Safety Act of 2016 (‘ESA’), was announced by the National Election Authority on the same day of the election announcement.

a. Section 1. Political demonstrations of more than ten people are not permitted on the public streets of Dola within 30 days of a general election where participants in such a demonstration spread an extremist or seditious message, or seek to incite hatred, violence, or disrupt the democratic process.

b. Section 2. Attending a public demonstration barred by Section 1of this Act constitutes an offence punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000.

c. Section 3. Inciting a public demonstration barred by of Section 1 of this Act constitutes an offence punishable by a maximum fine of $500,000 or two years’ imprisonment.

TT’s social media platform is accessible worldwide and has plenty of users in Dola, allowing users to post content, share or comment on posts. It ranks as the most popular source of news and political discussion in Dola.

Bella is an influential blogger, famous for always being the first to post the latest political rumors. She is particularly known for being sympathetic towards the Yo sect and against the government.

Within one month before the election, Bella’s column (‘A Letter to the Oppressors’) came out, accusing officials from the Zo sect of corruption and human rights violations against the Yo people, and called the August election a sham for Zo political gain. Furthermore, she cited a Yo unity song that “We trust that our faith will carry us home. We are not afraid to fight, not afraid to die”. Also, she echoed calls by other anti-government Dolans for a ‘Day of Resistance’ on August 1.

The column also went viral online through TT, viewed and shared worldwide. Dola’s domestic users of TT made provocative comments that they are prepared to take arms with them to the protest.

During the protest attended by Bella, some Yo demonstrators set fire to a Zo religious building frequented by leading government officials, and attacked law enforcement. Those attackers chanted the same words in the Yo unity song as Bella had used in her column ‘We are not afraid to fight, not afraid to die’.

Following the riots and violence, Bella was prosecuted pursuant to Section 3 of the ESA and was fined $300,000. Her conviction was upheld in Dola’s Supreme Court, exhausting their domestic appeals. She challenged the verdict in the European Court of Human Rights (“ECHR”).

2. Requirement

If you are the representative for the government, write a memorandum to explain Whether Dola’s prosecution of Bella under the ESA violates international principles, including Article 19 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“UDHR”) and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”). Please write in English.

Applicable law: UDHR, ICCPR, Case law of ECHR, general comments and other official documents of United Nations Human Rights Committee, etc.

 


 


版权所有:对外经济贸易大学法学院  地址:北京市朝阳区惠新东街10号宁远楼7层  邮编 :100029   邮箱:uibelawweb@163.com