Analysis on Responsibility of Apology
Abstract
Responsibility of apology originates from moral responsibility and bases on it, in which responsibility of apology uses the law enforcement as the remedy in the modern society. It is always a controversy issue for people that whether there should be moral responsibility or applicable law to be used for a sincere apology. Sincere apology helps people by eliminating disputes, and which is only rooted from the real heart of the person who should analogize. Apology under law enforcement is apparently unable to avoid disputes with the moral reflection to calm down the disputes. Both General Civil Law and Tort Liability Law state that apology is one way of legal liability, which is an acceptance for the solution of China’s traditional civil disputes and demonstration of the history and culture. It plays an important role for the execution of apology in moral aspects so as to promote social harmony and maintain social stability. Because of the lack of effective implementation of sincere apology, the execution with law enforcement is difficult to achieve the expected social effect.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Fu, C. Y. (2008). Application theory of apology in civil liabilities. Hebei Law, (4), 134.
Gu, A. R. (2000). Lecture of general principles of civil law of People’s Republic of China (p.245). Beijing: China Legal Publishing House.
Gu, A. R., Wang, J. F., & Jiang, P. (2000). Lecture on general rules of civil law of People’s Republic of China (p.245). Beijing: China Legal Publishing House.
Huang, Z. (2008). Serious attitudes on “apology”. Legal Science (Journal of Northwest University of Politics and Law), (5), 73.
Li, Y. (2012). Dilemma and breakthrough of the judicial confirmation system of the people’s mediation agreement. Journal of Sichuan University of Science and Engineering: Social Science Edition, (5), 83-86
Li, Y. Y. (1988). The civil law (p.604). Beijing: Peking University Press.
Robbenolt, J, K. (2003). Apologies and legal settlement: An empirical ex-amination. Michigan Law Review, (102), 460-517.
Volker, M. (1999). Discipline and punishment (B. C. Liu & Y. Y. Yang, Trans., p.17). Beijing: Joint Publishing Company.
Yang, L. X. (2010). Judicial interpretation provisions of tort liability law of People’s Republic of China (pp.85-86). Beijing: People’s Court Press.
Yao, H., & Duan, R. (2012). Alienation and return on “apology”. Journal of Renmin University of China, (2), 104.
Zheng, Y. Y., Jiang, X. L., & Sun, Z. B. (2006). The operation rules of civil executive procedure (pp.111-112). Beijing: China Legal Publishing House.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/n
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2016 Zhi ting LONG, Shixue QIU
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Please send your manuscripts to hess@cscanada.net,or hess@cscanada.org for consideration. We look forward to receiving your work.
Articles published in Higher Education of Social Science are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY).
HIGHER EDUCATION OF SOCIAL SCIENCE Editorial Office
Address: 1055 Rue Lucien-L'Allier, Unit #772, Montreal, QC H3G 3C4, Canada.
Telephone: 1-514-558 6138
Website: Http://www.cscanada.net Http://www.cscanada.org
E-mail: caooc@hotmail.com; office@cscanada.net
Copyright © 2010 Canadian Research & Development Center of Sciences and Cultures