發(fā)布時間：2017-12-27 15:31

  本文關鍵詞：虛假訴訟案外第三人權(quán)利救濟制度研究　出處：《安徽財經(jīng)大學》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

  更多相關文章： 虛假訴訟 案外第三人 權(quán)利救濟制度

【摘要】：伴隨著我國社會法治水平的提高,公民在增強法律意識的同時,卻帶來了虛假訴訟的問題。虛假訴訟的出現(xiàn)和頻發(fā),不但有損他人合乎法律規(guī)定的權(quán)益,擾亂了訴訟秩序,更是對法律權(quán)威和尊嚴的無視,影響了社會的穩(wěn)定與發(fā)展。當下民事訴訟中,經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)行為人利用訴訟途徑損害案外第三人正當權(quán)益的現(xiàn)象。但往往當案外第三人想要尋求法律救濟其正當權(quán)益時,卻找不到一種較為完善的法律程序?qū)ζ溥M行救濟。而保護案外第三人正當權(quán)益免受侵害,堅決抵制此類侵害行為的出現(xiàn)是《民事訴訟法》中誠實信用原則的體現(xiàn),是實現(xiàn)司法公正的必然選擇。那么,怎樣在立法中完善對受損害的第三人正當權(quán)益的保護成為當下亟待處理的關鍵。本文中,筆者先分析了我國案外第三人權(quán)利救濟制度的現(xiàn)狀和缺陷,接著通過研究域外國家和地區(qū)相關立法的制度規(guī)定,借鑒他們的豐富經(jīng)驗,從程序保障的角度出發(fā),提出將事前保障和事后保障結(jié)合起來,在立法上對虛假訴訟案外第三人權(quán)利救濟制度加以完善。本文主要分為四個部分。第一部分為虛假訴訟及其對案外第三人權(quán)利的損害。通過借鑒并分析理論界學者的觀點,歸納出筆者對虛假訴訟含義的見解,同時通過對一些具體司法數(shù)據(jù)的收集整理,觀察實務中發(fā)生的一些虛假訴訟現(xiàn)象,分析研究我國近幾年虛假訴訟的現(xiàn)狀,并且從侵犯物權(quán)、債權(quán)、配偶一方合法權(quán)益、知識產(chǎn)權(quán)這四個領域中類型化出虛假訴訟對案外第三人權(quán)利損害的現(xiàn)狀。第二部分為我國虛假訴訟案外第三人權(quán)利救濟制度的現(xiàn)狀及缺陷。首先,筆者闡述了我國現(xiàn)階段對受虛假訴訟損害的案外第三人權(quán)利救濟制度的立法規(guī)定,主要分為事前保護制度(法院的訴訟告知和案外人參與訴訟)和事后救濟制度(第三人撤銷之訴、執(zhí)行異議之訴和案外人再審)這兩種制度模式;其次,具體分析每一種制度存在的弊端及其適用上存在的不足,為文章第四部分筆者在現(xiàn)有救濟方式的基礎上提出完善的初步構(gòu)想奠定基礎。第三部分將域外國家和地區(qū)對虛假訴訟案外第三人權(quán)利救濟制度的規(guī)定做出對比。英美法系主要是規(guī)定完善的事前保障比如第三人制度保護虛假訴訟受害人的合法權(quán)益;大陸法系國家（地區(qū)）是通過完善的事后保障如第三人撤銷之訴和第三人申請再審這兩種方式保護虛假訴訟受害人的合法權(quán)益。筆者希望通過對域外國家和地區(qū)相關規(guī)定的分析,并在此基礎上加以借鑒,以便更好的探究我國對此方面的制度規(guī)定。第四部分為我國虛假訴訟案外第三人權(quán)利救濟制度的完善。通過分析我國現(xiàn)有法律制度存在的不足,探究域外國家和地區(qū)的相關經(jīng)驗,最后總結(jié)出一些完善我國案外第三人權(quán)利救濟制度的建議。如將法院訴訟告知的“可為”改為“應為”、將純正的案外第三人納入第三人參與的范圍、擴大第三人撤銷之訴的主客體范圍、區(qū)分執(zhí)行異議之訴的裁決機構(gòu)與執(zhí)行機構(gòu)、拓展案外人申請再審的案件類型等等。
[Abstract]:With the improvement of the level of the rule of law in our society, citizens have brought about the problem of false litigation while enhancing their legal consciousness. The emergence and frequent occurrence of false litigation not only damages others' rights and interests, but also disturbs the order of litigation, ignores the authority and dignity of the law, and affects the stability and development of the society. In the current civil litigation, there is often a phenomenon that the actor uses the litigation way to damage the legitimate rights and interests of the third people outside the case. But when third people want to seek legal remedies for their legitimate rights and interests, they can not find a more perfect legal procedure to remedy them. The protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the third persons outside the protection case is not infringed. It is the embodiment of the principle of good faith in the civil procedural law and the inevitable choice to achieve judicial justice that we must resolutely resist such violations. Then, how to improve the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the damaged third people in the legislation has become the key to the immediate treatment. In this paper, the author first analyzes our country the third party rights status and defects of relief system, then through the study of foreign countries and regions relevant legislation and regulations, learn from their experience, starting from the angle of procedure guarantee, the guarantee in advance and post protection combined, the legislation on the false lawsuit the third human rights relief system should be perfected. This article is divided into four parts. The first part is the case of false litigation and the rights of the third party damage. By drawing on the theory and analysis of the views of scholars, the author sums up the meaning of false legal opinions, at the same time through the specific judicial data collected, some false litigation phenomenon observed in practice, the research on the present situation of our country in recent years of false litigation, and status from the four areas of infringement of property rights and creditor the spouse, the legitimate rights and interests of intellectual property rights in the case of third types of out false litigation rights damage. The second part is the status and defects of the third party's rights relief system outside the false lawsuit case in China. First of all, the author expounds the legislation of China at this stage of the false litigation damages by the third party rights relief system, mainly divided into pre protection system (court and inform the outsider to participate in the proceedings and relief system (third) lawsuit, execution objection litigation and outsider retrial) the two modes of system; secondly, analyze shortcomings of disadvantages of every kind of system and its application, which lays the foundation for the fourth part of the thesis, based on the existing remedies proposed on the preliminary conception of perfect. The third part makes a comparison between the foreign countries and regions on the provisions of the third party's rights relief system outside the false lawsuit. Common law is the main provisions in advance such as the third system to protect the legitimate rights and interests of victims of fraud litigation support; civil law countries (regions) is to improve after the security such as the withdraw of the third person and the third person to apply for protection of victims of Fraud Litigation Retrial of the two kinds of legal rights. The author hopes to make an analysis of relevant provisions of the extraterritorial countries and regions and draw lessons from them so as to better explore the institutional provisions of this aspect in China. The fourth part is the improvement of the third party's rights relief system outside the false lawsuit case in China. By analyzing the shortcomings of the existing legal system in China, we explore the relevant experience of overseas countries and regions, and finally conclude some suggestions for improving our third party's right relief system. If the court told the "could be" to "should be", the pure case third people into third people involved in the scope, expand the withdraw of the third person of the subject and object scope, distinguish the implementation of objection decision mechanism and execution mechanism, expand the outsider retrial case type etc..
【學位授予單位】：安徽財經(jīng)大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D925.3

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前1條

1 蔡虹;馮娟;;案外人申請再審制度初探[J];山東警察學院學報;2012年02期

，

本文編號：1342292