論我國民事訴訟保全擔保制度
發(fā)布時間：2018-11-09 18:37
【摘要】：民事訴訟保全擔保制度,是在民事訴訟保全程序中,保全申請人向法院申請保全時,法院根據(jù)保全類型的不同,以及案件具體情況,要求保全申請人提供擔保,以保障被保全人的合法利益。我國經(jīng)濟現(xiàn)在處于中高速發(fā)展時期,在司法實踐中,保全擔保愈來愈重要。然而,現(xiàn)行立法并未對保全擔保作出明確具體的規(guī)定,使得司法實踐運行困難。為了能夠更好地發(fā)揮民事訴訟保全擔保制度的作用,本文緊緊圍繞,擔保的必要性審查原則、方式、數(shù)額等內(nèi)容,依次論述,希望有助于司法實踐的運行,有利于當事人合法權利的保護。本文的主要內(nèi)容如下:第一部分關于民事訴訟保全擔保制度的定義與功能定位。第一節(jié)主要是了解民事訴訟保全擔保的定義及辨析;第二節(jié)主要論述保全擔保的功能定位。對當前學界代表性的觀點進行梳理,主要包括防止申請人濫用保全、彌補申請人釋明不足、保障被保全人合法利益。然后,對代表性觀點分別評析,得出筆者的觀點,即民事訴訟保全擔保的功能應該是保障被保全人的合法利益。第二部分剖析了我國民事訴訟保全擔保制度的現(xiàn)狀與不足。其中分別從保全擔保的必要性審查原則、方式和數(shù)額三個方面,對我國保全擔保制度的現(xiàn)狀進行梳理。我國民事訴訟保全擔保制度的不足體現(xiàn)在:對該制度的設置過分注重擔保,民事訴訟保全擔保的必要性審查原則設立的不合理,對擔保的方式未作明確規(guī)定,相關司法解釋對擔保數(shù)額的規(guī)定在實踐中執(zhí)行起來困難重重,標準單一、不科學。民事訴訟保全擔保的程序不具體,包括設立程序、實現(xiàn)程序和解除程序的不明確。司法實務中,甘肅、重慶等地高院作出了變通性規(guī)定,通過比較分析,提煉出值得借鑒之處。第三部分闡述了民事訴訟保全擔保制度的比較法考察。分別從民事訴訟保全擔保的必要性審查原則、數(shù)額、方式以及解除程序等方面,介紹了德國、日本、美國以及我國臺灣地區(qū)的相關立法規(guī)定,并提煉了我國民事訴訟立法可以學習和借鑒的地方。第四部分總結我國民事訴訟保全擔保制度的完善建議。在必要性審查原則上,明確保全擔保并非民事訴訟保全的必要條件,同時增加了申請人免于提供擔保的特殊情形;由立法明確列舉民事訴訟保全擔保的方式,包括五種,即現(xiàn)金擔保、實物擔保、財產(chǎn)擔保、權利擔保、責任保險擔保。明確允許多種方式聯(lián)合擔保的規(guī)定。科學設定民事訴訟保全擔保的數(shù)額比例,確立以可能損失額作為保全擔保數(shù)額標準的原則,突破現(xiàn)有司法解釋中的單一比例的規(guī)定,進一步細化分段數(shù)額標準;在現(xiàn)有的追加擔保規(guī)定的基礎上,增加變更擔保的規(guī)定。在程序設置上,規(guī)范民事訴訟保全擔保的設立、實現(xiàn)和解除程序。
[Abstract]:The system of preservation security in civil action is that when the applicant applies to the court for preservation in civil proceedings, the court requires the applicant to provide security according to the different types of preservation and the specific circumstances of the case. In order to protect the legitimate interests of the protected person. China's economy is now in a period of high-speed development. In judicial practice, security preservation is becoming more and more important. However, the current legislation does not make clear and specific provisions on security preservation, which makes the operation of judicial practice difficult. In order to play a better role in the preservation of security system in civil proceedings, this paper closely revolves around the necessity of security review principles, methods, amounts and so on, in order to discuss, hoping to help the operation of judicial practice. It is beneficial to the protection of the legal rights of the parties concerned. The main contents of this paper are as follows: the first part is about the definition and function of the preservation security system in civil action. The first section is mainly to understand the definition and discrimination of the preservation security in civil action, and the second section mainly discusses the function orientation of the preservation security. It mainly includes preventing the applicant from abusing preservation, making up for the deficiency of the applicant's explanation, and protecting the legitimate interests of the protected person. Then, the representative point of view is analyzed, and the author points out that the function of the preservation guarantee in civil action should be to protect the legitimate interests of the protected person. The second part analyzes the current situation and deficiency of the preservation guarantee system in civil litigation in China. In this paper, the necessity principle, method and amount of preservation security are reviewed respectively, and the present situation of preservation security system in our country is combed out. The deficiency of our country's civil litigation preservation security system lies in: the establishment of this system pays too much attention to the guarantee, the unreasonable establishment of the principle of the necessity examination of the civil litigation preservation guarantee, and the lack of clear regulation on the way of the guarantee. The relevant judicial interpretation of the amount of security provisions in practice is difficult to implement, the standard is single, unscientific. The procedure of security preservation in civil action is not specific, including establishing procedure, realizing procedure and dissolving procedure. In judicial practice, Gansu, Chongqing and other high courts made flexible provisions, through comparative analysis, to extract the reference. The third part expounds the comparative law investigation of the preservation guarantee system in civil action. From the aspects of the principle, amount, method and dissolution procedure of the necessity review of the preservation security in civil action, this paper introduces the relevant legislative provisions of Germany, Japan, the United States and Taiwan. And has refined our country civil lawsuit legislation may study and draw lessons from the place. The fourth part summarizes our country civil lawsuit preservation guarantee system consummates the proposal. In the principle of necessity examination, it is clear that the preservation of security is not a necessary condition for the preservation of civil action, and at the same time increases the special circumstances in which the applicant is exempted from providing security; The legislation explicitly enumerates the ways of civil litigation preservation security, including five kinds, namely, cash guarantee, physical security, property guarantee, right guarantee, liability insurance guarantee. A provision expressly allowing multiple forms of joint sponsorship. Setting the proportion of the amount of the preservation guarantee scientifically, establishing the principle of taking the amount of the possible loss as the standard of the amount of the security, breaking through the single proportion in the current judicial interpretation, and further refining the standard of the amount of the subsection; In addition to the existing additional security provisions, the addition of security provisions. In procedural setting, standardize the establishment, realization and release of security in civil action.
【學位授予單位】：中央民族大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D925.1
本文編號：2321238
[Abstract]:The system of preservation security in civil action is that when the applicant applies to the court for preservation in civil proceedings, the court requires the applicant to provide security according to the different types of preservation and the specific circumstances of the case. In order to protect the legitimate interests of the protected person. China's economy is now in a period of high-speed development. In judicial practice, security preservation is becoming more and more important. However, the current legislation does not make clear and specific provisions on security preservation, which makes the operation of judicial practice difficult. In order to play a better role in the preservation of security system in civil proceedings, this paper closely revolves around the necessity of security review principles, methods, amounts and so on, in order to discuss, hoping to help the operation of judicial practice. It is beneficial to the protection of the legal rights of the parties concerned. The main contents of this paper are as follows: the first part is about the definition and function of the preservation security system in civil action. The first section is mainly to understand the definition and discrimination of the preservation security in civil action, and the second section mainly discusses the function orientation of the preservation security. It mainly includes preventing the applicant from abusing preservation, making up for the deficiency of the applicant's explanation, and protecting the legitimate interests of the protected person. Then, the representative point of view is analyzed, and the author points out that the function of the preservation guarantee in civil action should be to protect the legitimate interests of the protected person. The second part analyzes the current situation and deficiency of the preservation guarantee system in civil litigation in China. In this paper, the necessity principle, method and amount of preservation security are reviewed respectively, and the present situation of preservation security system in our country is combed out. The deficiency of our country's civil litigation preservation security system lies in: the establishment of this system pays too much attention to the guarantee, the unreasonable establishment of the principle of the necessity examination of the civil litigation preservation guarantee, and the lack of clear regulation on the way of the guarantee. The relevant judicial interpretation of the amount of security provisions in practice is difficult to implement, the standard is single, unscientific. The procedure of security preservation in civil action is not specific, including establishing procedure, realizing procedure and dissolving procedure. In judicial practice, Gansu, Chongqing and other high courts made flexible provisions, through comparative analysis, to extract the reference. The third part expounds the comparative law investigation of the preservation guarantee system in civil action. From the aspects of the principle, amount, method and dissolution procedure of the necessity review of the preservation security in civil action, this paper introduces the relevant legislative provisions of Germany, Japan, the United States and Taiwan. And has refined our country civil lawsuit legislation may study and draw lessons from the place. The fourth part summarizes our country civil lawsuit preservation guarantee system consummates the proposal. In the principle of necessity examination, it is clear that the preservation of security is not a necessary condition for the preservation of civil action, and at the same time increases the special circumstances in which the applicant is exempted from providing security; The legislation explicitly enumerates the ways of civil litigation preservation security, including five kinds, namely, cash guarantee, physical security, property guarantee, right guarantee, liability insurance guarantee. A provision expressly allowing multiple forms of joint sponsorship. Setting the proportion of the amount of the preservation guarantee scientifically, establishing the principle of taking the amount of the possible loss as the standard of the amount of the security, breaking through the single proportion in the current judicial interpretation, and further refining the standard of the amount of the subsection; In addition to the existing additional security provisions, the addition of security provisions. In procedural setting, standardize the establishment, realization and release of security in civil action.
【學位授予單位】：中央民族大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D925.1
【參考文獻】
相關期刊論文 前10條
1 程鑫;陳麗娜;;海事訴訟保全責任險的發(fā)展態(tài)勢、省思與前瞻[J];中國海商法研究;2016年03期
2 吳在存;;在財產(chǎn)保全中引入責任保險擔保的路徑及其價值[J];人民法治;2016年09期
3 肖建國;張寶成;;論民事保全錯誤損害賠償責任的歸責原則——兼論《民事訴訟法》第105條與《侵權責任法》第5條的關系[J];法律適用;2016年01期
4 孟源;張演亮;;保全擔保數(shù)額的審查確定[J];人民司法;2015年23期
5 劉哲瑋;;論財產(chǎn)保全制度的結構矛盾與消解途徑[J];法學論壇;2015年05期
6 劉君博;;保全程序中擔保的提供與擔保數(shù)額的確定——《民事訴訟法》司法解釋第152條的意義及其解釋適用[J];法律適用;2015年08期
7 周翠;;行為保全問題研究——對《民事訴訟法》第100-105條的解釋[J];法律科學(西北政法大學學報);2015年04期
8 陳霞;;論知識產(chǎn)權行為保全的制度化構建[J];吉首大學學報(社會科學版);2015年S1期
9 李曉楓;郭萍;;評析《民事訴訟法》中行為保全制度的立法突破與不足[J];法律適用;2015年06期
10 王莉娟;譚筱清;;從知識產(chǎn)權禁令到行為保全制度的完善[J];人民司法;2014年05期
相關重要報紙文章 前3條
1 陳樹森;;財產(chǎn)保全責任險審查中應注意的問題[N];人民法院報;2017年
2 李凡;;優(yōu)化我國財產(chǎn)保全擔保制度[N];中國社會科學報;2016年
3 謝忠文;;訴訟保全擔保范圍和期間要明確[N];檢察日報;2013年
相關博士學位論文 前4條
1 楊薇薇;中國海事請求保全制度正當性研究[D];大連海事大學;2013年
2 范毅強;民事保全程序要論[D];西南政法大學;2008年
3 王福華;民事保全制度研究[D];中國政法大學;2005年
4 李仕春;民事保全程序研究[D];中國政法大學;2002年
，本文編號：2321238
本文鏈接：http://www.sikaile.net/falvlunwen/susongfa/2321238.html
