论中国民事判决效力扩张之反思与限定
作者:
基金项目:

重庆大学中央高校基本科研业务费资助项目"公益诉讼当事人适格与判决效力扩张研究"(106112016CDJSK080007)


Reflection and limitation of the extension of civil judgment effects in China
Author:
  • 摘要
  • | |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献 [7]
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • | | |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    大陆法系德日等国民诉立法及学说中的既判力、执行力等民事判决效力的扩张均有限定。而中国的相关司法解释及实务报道却表明中国判决效力扩张存在随意性。预决效力扩张了既判力客观范围,既判力相对性也未得到严格遵循,其有时会不当地向他人扩张;合伙组织清偿能力不足时将合伙人追加为被执行人,是执行力扩张的示例。这些扩张不仅与传统理论不符,也不利于特定主体的程序利益保障。为此应限缩判决效力的扩张。

    Abstract:

    Extension of civil judgment effects, such as res judicata and enforceability is limited in Continental law countries, eg. Germany and Japan. However, China's relevant judicial interpretations and legal practice reports indicates that the extension of civil judgment effects is reckless. Pre-decisive effect expanded the objective scope of res judicata, the relativity of res judicata has not been strictly followed, sometimes it improperly expanded to others parties outside the lawsuit; addition of the partners of a partnership as enforces, when the partnership organizations is not able to pay off its debt, is an example of the extension of enforceability. These expansions are not only incompatible with the traditional theory, but also not enough to provide procedural protects to particular party. Therefore, extension of civil judgment effects should be limited.

    参考文献
    [1] 梁书文.民事诉讼法适用意见新解[M].北京:法制出版社,2001:140.
    [2] 宋春雨.生效裁判的事实证明效力[C]//最高人民法院民一庭.中国民事审判前沿(2005年第2集).北京:法律出版社,2005:70.
    [3] 胡军辉.民事诉讼中如何处理既判事实预决效力问题的思考[J].政治与法律,2010(8):147-154.
    [4] 骆永家.举证责任论[M].(中国)台北:台湾商务印书馆,1972:32.
    [5] 魏新璋,张军斌,李燕山.对"虚假诉讼"有关问题的调查与思考——以浙江法院防范和查处虚假诉讼的实践为例[J].法律适用,2009(1):64-65.
    [6] 肖建华.论我国无独立请求权第三人制度的重构[J].政法论坛,2000(1):110-120.
    [7] 新堂幸司.新民事诉讼法[M].林剑锋,译.北京:法律出版社,2008:494-497.
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文

廖浩.论中国民事判决效力扩张之反思与限定[J].重庆大学学报社会科学版,2016,22(3):159-164. DOI:10.11835/j. issn.1008-5831.2016.03.021

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:1018
  • 下载次数: 878
  • HTML阅读次数: 927
  • 引用次数: 0
历史
  • 收稿日期:2015-12-14
  • 在线发布日期: 2016-06-17
文章二维码