登录 EN

添加临时用户

事实导向型的诉讼标的理论

On “Fact-oriented” Streitgegenstand: Research on Kernpunkttheorie and Transaction

作者:刘子赫
  • 学号
    2018******
  • 学位
    硕士
  • 电子邮箱
    liu******com
  • 答辩日期
    2020.05.21
  • 导师
    任重
  • 学科名
    法学
  • 页码
    103
  • 保密级别
    公开
  • 培养单位
    066 法学院
  • 中文关键词
    诉讼标的,事实导向,核心点理论,纠纷事件
  • 英文关键词
    Streitgegenstand, Fact-oriented, Kernpunkt, Transaction

摘要

当事人的权利表达必须在民事诉讼中得到清晰界定,方能使其真正主张和实现民事实体权益。为了精细化识别当事人诉求,我国民事诉讼学界在上世纪后期重拾诉讼标的理论,并展开了富有成效的研究和讨论。但由于理论界对诉讼标的识别标准的不同认识以及识别标准的抽象性,实务界未能充分贯彻传统诉讼标的理论,以致呈现出多种识别方式混杂的局面,这使得我国诉讼标的理论的讨论一度陷入沉寂。针对深刻影响我国司法实践的“纠纷一次性解决”理念及其典型案例,以欧洲法院核心点理论(Kernpunkttheorie)和美国法纠纷事件(transaction or occurrence)为中心的事实导向型诉讼标的理论也被引入我国,并被作为解释我国实务经验的新框架。这两个新近引入的理论都具有促进争议一次性审理的特点:起源于《布鲁塞尔公约》中重复起诉(lis pendens)制度的核心点理论可以在诉讼系属阶段进行客观强制合并;美国法上诉因概念经过扩大形成在《联邦民事诉讼规则》中多处出现的“纠纷事件”,进一步作用于强制反诉等制度。虽然核心点理论和纠纷事件与我国诉讼标的识别标准存在不同前提和语境,事实导向型诉讼标的概念对我国实践仍有一定借鉴意义。不过,在维持既有权利导向型诉讼标的概念下,通过解释已有规范,借鉴德国、日本制度并汲取核心点理论和纠纷事件的营养,同样有机会达到类似效果。

Only if his right of claim is clarified in civil procedure, the plaintiff (sometimes including defendant) can truly claim and enforce his civil right. To accurately identify parties’ claims, Chinese civil procedure scholars have revisited the theory of Streitgegenstand since the last decades of last century, which promoted productive research and discussion to take place. Nevertheless, considering the different opinions on Streitgegenstand and its abstractiveness, practitioners could not insist on implementation of traditional Streitgegenstand, so the theory of it once felt into the doldrums. Inspired by the “one-time dispute solution” thought and the Guiding Cases under it, some Chinese scholars have concerned themselves in Kernpunkttheorie developed by European Court of Justice and cause of action in America, which more highlight the importance of fact (instead of right) in cases than traditional Germany theories. Both of these newly introduced theories can promote disputes to be settled in one trial: the Kernpunkttheorie is originated from lis pendens rules in 1968 Brussel Convention and mainly about compulsory joinder of claims (especially opposite ones) between pending cases; the enlargement of cause of action deeply impacts on the generation of transaction or occurrence in Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. These fact-oriented theories about Streitgegenstand offer important lessons for our practice, it might still be possible, through interpretation and introspection, to use existed right-oriented theory to achieve a similar effect in China.