公平原則-解放軍文職人員招聘-軍隊(duì)文職考試-紅師教育
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2017-08-10 19:48:40*三、公平原則*（一）概念：民事主體應(yīng)依據(jù)社會(huì)公認(rèn)的公平觀念從事活動(dòng)，以維持當(dāng)事人之間的利益均衡。*（二）含義*1、民法在規(guī)范民事主體的權(quán)利、義務(wù)與責(zé)任的承擔(dān)上，體現(xiàn)公平原則，兼顧各方當(dāng)事人的利益。*2、民事活動(dòng)中，依公平原則確定各方具體的權(quán)利義務(wù)。*（三）立法體現(xiàn)*民法通則第4條，其中的等價(jià)有償也是公平原則的一個(gè)體現(xiàn)。*顯失公平制度*四、誠(chéng)實(shí)信用原則*（一）概念：指民事主體進(jìn)行民事活動(dòng)時(shí)必須誠(chéng)實(shí)、善意，信守承諾。*（二）地位：*1、誠(chéng)信原則常被奉為民法中的 帝王條款 ，有君臨民法全域的效力。*2、另一方面，該原則具有填補(bǔ)法律漏洞的功能。*3、近代以來(lái)，從此原則又衍生出一個(gè)新的原則即：權(quán)利不得濫用原則。*（三）立法體現(xiàn)*民法通則第4條*五、合法權(quán)益受法律保護(hù)原則*民法通則第5條規(guī)定： 公民、法人的合法的民事權(quán)益受法律保護(hù)，任何組織和個(gè)人不得侵犯。*此處之權(quán)益包括兩部分： 權(quán) 、 益 。*權(quán)利：在利益之上設(shè)定了當(dāng)事人得自己實(shí)現(xiàn)其利益內(nèi)容的手段。*法益：雖未在其上賦予法律上的實(shí)現(xiàn)手段，但法律應(yīng)予以保護(hù)的那些利益。*六、守法原則*（一）基本理解：守法原則的核心是：民事主體的民事活動(dòng)應(yīng)當(dāng)遵守法律和行政法規(guī)。*須注意的是，這里所指的守法對(duì)象并非指民法中的任意性規(guī)范和倡導(dǎo)性規(guī)范，而是指遵守法律行政法規(guī)中的強(qiáng)行性規(guī)范。*（二）立法體現(xiàn)*民法通則第6條。* 民事活動(dòng)必須遵守法律，法律沒(méi)有規(guī)定的，應(yīng)當(dāng)遵守國(guó)家政策。*七、公序良俗原則*民事活動(dòng)應(yīng)當(dāng)尊重社會(huì)公德，不得損害社會(huì)公共利益，[破壞國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)計(jì)劃]（已據(jù)2009.8.27全國(guó)人大常委會(huì)10次會(huì)議決定刪除），擾亂社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)秩序。*公序：指國(guó)家社會(huì)的存在及其發(fā)展所必需的一般秩序。公序更多的是從客觀角度而言，是指由眾多的客觀存在的有形的具體制度構(gòu)建起來(lái)的秩序。*良俗：一般認(rèn)為系指為社會(huì)、國(guó)家的存在和發(fā)展所必要的一般道德，是特定社會(huì)所尊重的最起碼的倫理要求。良俗更多的是從主觀角度上而言，是指一社會(huì)存在的善良風(fēng)俗。*應(yīng)指出，因各國(guó)民事立法指導(dǎo)思想不同，國(guó)情不同，社會(huì)觀念的差別，公序良俗的內(nèi)容也有所不同。
解放軍文職招聘考試公平的分配-解放軍文職人員招聘-軍隊(duì)文職考試-紅師教育
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2017-06-28 16:13:23一個(gè)炎熱的下午，兩個(gè)農(nóng)民在一棵大樹下乘涼。其中一個(gè)叫拉姆，另一個(gè)叫希亞。兩個(gè)人都帶著美味的面包充當(dāng)午飯。拉姆帶了3個(gè)面包，希亞帶了5個(gè)。正當(dāng)他們準(zhǔn)備吃午飯的時(shí)候，一個(gè)商人路過(guò)此地。下午好，兩位先生。 商人向拉姆和希亞問(wèn)候道。商人看起來(lái)又累又餓，所以拉姆和希亞邀請(qǐng)他和他們一起吃午飯。但是我們有三個(gè)人怎么分這三個(gè)面包呢？ 拉姆為難了。我們把面包放在一起，再把每個(gè)面包切成均等的三塊。 希亞建議道。把面包切開后，他們把面包平均分成三份，每個(gè)人都不多也不少。吃完面包后，商人堅(jiān)持要給他們錢。拉姆和希亞推辭不掉，只好收下。待商人離開后，兩人一數(shù)金幣的數(shù)量 8個(gè)。8個(gè)金幣，兩個(gè)人。我們就每人4個(gè)金幣。 拉姆說(shuō)道。這不公平。 西亞大聲反對(duì)， 我有5個(gè)面包，你只有3個(gè)。所以我應(yīng)該拿5個(gè)金幣，你只能拿3個(gè)。拉姆不想爭(zhēng)吵，但他也不想給希亞5個(gè)金幣。我們?nèi)フ掖彘L(zhǎng)做裁決。他是個(gè)公正的人。 拉姆說(shuō)道。他們來(lái)到村長(zhǎng)毛爾維的家，把整個(gè)事情的經(jīng)過(guò)告訴了他。毛爾維想了很久，最后說(shuō)： 分配這筆錢的公平辦法就是希亞拿7個(gè)金幣，拉姆拿1個(gè)。什么？ 拉姆驚叫道。我為什么該得7個(gè)？ 希亞也覺(jué)得很奇怪。當(dāng)毛爾維把他的分配理由解釋清楚后，拉姆和希亞打偶沒(méi)有對(duì)這個(gè)分配再提出異議。這真的是一個(gè)公平的裁決嗎？要知道毛爾維的裁決是否公平，就要先回答這些問(wèn)題：1、8個(gè)面包被切成了多少塊？2、每個(gè)人吃了多少塊面包？3、拉姆的面包被分成了多少塊？4、拉姆吃了8塊面包，還剩幾塊留給商人？5、希亞的面包被分成了多上塊？6、希亞吃了8塊面包，還剩幾塊留給商人？毛爾維決定只給拉姆一個(gè)硬幣，而給希亞7個(gè)，是因?yàn)樯倘顺粤?塊面包，只有一塊是從拉姆的面包中來(lái)的，而其余7塊都是希亞的。點(diǎn)示：我們憤憤不平，太多是因?yàn)槲覀冎粫?huì)算計(jì)，不會(huì)計(jì)算。Just AllocationIn a hot afternoon, two farmers were enjoying the cool under the tree. One farmer called L and the other called X. both carried tasty bread as their lunch. Ltook three bread and X five. A businessman passed by when they were ready to have lunch.good afternoon, gentlemen. The businessman greeted L and X. the businessman was tires and hungry. L and X invited him to have dinner together.But we three men how to separate three breads? L confused.Let s put the breads together, then divide every one into three equal parts. X suggested.Cutting and dividing the breads, they all got the exact one.Eating up the breads, the businessman insisted to pay and L and X have no idea but to get it.When the businessman went away, L and X counted the number of golden bills----eight.Eight bills, two person. Four bills every one. L said.It s unjust, X opposed loudly, I had five breads and you just three, so I should get five bills and you three.L reluctant to argue, neither would he gave X five bills.Let s invite our village manager Morwey s house and tell all to him. Thinking for a while, Morwey replied: The just way to distribute these bill is X take seven bills and L one.Pardon? L screamed.Why should I posses seven? Xalso felt strange.After Morwey explained his reason clearly, both Land X had no dispute on this allocation.Was this really a just rule?Answer these questions before you decide whether it was just or not:1.How many small pieces the eight breads were divided into?2.How many pieces every one ate?3.How many small pieces did L s breads?4.How many pieces L left for the businessman after he ate eight?5.How many small pieces did X s breads were divided into?6.How many pieces X left for the businessman after he ate eight?The reason that Morwey only gave L one bill and X seven because the businessman ate eight pieces and only one was left from L s while other seven pieces from X.Tips: we always indignant mostly because we are used to scheming, but not counting.
