本文選題：群體訴訟 + 代表人訴訟�。� 參考：《山東大學》2009年碩士論文

【摘要】： 隨著我國改革的深入和市場經濟的快速發(fā)展,社會成員之間的聯系更加廣泛和緊密,糾紛形態(tài)也呈現出與一些發(fā)達國家相類似的特點,逐漸向大型化和復雜化方向發(fā)展。為應對此種大型化的群體性糾紛,1991年頒行的民事訴訟法典,在總結司法實踐經驗,借鑒美國集團訴訟和日本的選定當事人制度的立法經驗的基礎上,確立了我國群體性訴訟制度,即代表人訴訟制度。但我國代表人訴訟制度并沒能發(fā)揮應有的解決群體糾紛,維護社會穩(wěn)定的作用,在實踐中的運行效果與立法者、法學家和社會的預期差距較大,尤其是人數不確定的代表人訴訟制度,很少被法院啟用,立法資源有被嚴重浪費之嫌。當然這種局面是在多種因素的作用下形成的:一方面,我國代表人訴訟制度立法過于粗疏簡單,存在嚴重的缺陷,從根本上制約了該制度功能的發(fā)揮;另一方面,我國社會轉型時期利益關系復雜,涉及民事、行政等眾多領域的群體性糾紛也遠遠超出了代表人訴訟制度的功能范圍;加之我國法院內部不合理的管理模式和司法獨立的缺失,讓代表人訴訟制度在實踐中更是舉步維艱。為此,本文運用比較分析法和實證分析法,在剖析我國代表人訴訟制度立法和司法實踐和考察國外幾種典型群體性訴訟制度的基礎上,結合我國的國情和實際情況,提出了完善我國代表人訴訟制度的具體建議。 全文共分為以下三部分: 第一部分,我國代表人訴訟制度的分析。首先,對我國代表人訴訟制度的立法背景、相關法條、程序構成、概念和制度特點進行詳細歸納和總結;其次,結合司法實踐,簡要概述我國代表人訴訟制度在實踐中的運行狀況;最后,對我國代表人訴訟制度的缺陷和相關制度環(huán)境進行反思,總結出我國代表人訴訟制度無法實現其制度預期的根本原因。 第二部分,國外群體性訴訟制度研究。對國外幾種典型的群體性訴訟制度,包括美國的集團訴訟制度,德國的團體訴訟制度和日本的選定當事人制度進行剖析,對其概念內涵、制度特點、運行現狀進行簡要總結,從而為完善我國的代表人訴訟制度和建立相關配套制度提供有價值的立法借鑒。 第三部分,完善我國代表人訴訟制度的設想。在前兩章的基礎上,提出完善我國代表人訴訟制度的具體構想。
[Abstract]:With the deepening of China's reform and the rapid development of the market economy, the relationship between the social members is more extensive and close, and the form of disputes also shows similar characteristics with some developed countries, and gradually develops towards the direction of large-scale and complicated. In order to deal with such large-scale group disputes, the Civil procedure Code enacted in 1991, on the basis of summing up the judicial practice experience and drawing lessons from the legislative experience of the United States group litigation and the Japanese system of selected parties, Established our country group lawsuit system, namely representative action system. However, the representative litigation system in our country has not been able to play its due role in resolving group disputes and maintaining social stability. The operational effect in practice is quite different from that of legislators, jurists and society. In particular, the uncertain representative litigation system is seldom used by the court, and the legislative resources are seriously wasted. Of course, this kind of situation is formed under the action of many factors: on the one hand, the legislation of representative litigation system in our country is too careless and simple, and there are serious defects, which fundamentally restrict the function of the system; on the other hand, In the period of social transformation, the interest relationship is complex, involving civil, administrative and other areas of group disputes far beyond the functional scope of representative litigation system, coupled with the lack of unreasonable management model and judicial independence within the courts of our country. Let the representative litigation system in practice is more difficult. Therefore, this paper applies comparative analysis and empirical analysis, on the basis of analyzing the legislative and judicial practice of representative litigation system in our country and investigating several typical group litigation systems in foreign countries, combined with the national conditions and actual conditions of our country. The author puts forward some concrete suggestions on how to perfect the representative litigation system in our country. The thesis is divided into three parts: the first part, the analysis of representative litigation system in China. First of all, the legislative background, relevant laws, procedural components, concepts and system characteristics of the representative litigation system in China are summarized and summarized in detail; secondly, combined with judicial practice, This paper briefly summarizes the running situation of the representative litigation system in our country in practice, and finally, reflects on the defects and related institutional environment of the representative litigation system in our country. Summarize the fundamental reason that our representative litigation system can not realize its system expectation. The second part, the foreign group litigation system research. This paper analyzes several typical group litigation systems in foreign countries, including the class action system in the United States, the group action system in Germany and the selected party system in Japan. Thus, it provides valuable legislative reference for perfecting representative litigation system and establishing relevant supporting system in our country. The third part, perfect our country representative lawsuit system assumption. On the basis of the first two chapters, the author puts forward the concrete idea of perfecting the representative litigation system in our country.
【學位授予單位】：山東大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2009
【分類號】：D925.1

【引證文獻】

相關碩士學位論文 前4條

1 姚琛靈;論我國法院適用代表人訴訟制度的困境及其解決[D];中央民族大學;2011年

2 程娟娟;論我國代表人訴訟制度的重構[D];復旦大學;2011年

3 冉光耀;論代表人訴訟[D];西南政法大學;2011年

4 衛(wèi)克琴;我國群體訴訟制度的改革與完善[D];太原科技大學;2012年

，

本文編號：2061266