处分权主义与审判监督程序的结构——最高人民法院指导案例7号研究

发布时间：2018-03-22 08:30

本文选题：处分权主义　切入点：指导案例号　出处：《法制与社会发展》2013年06期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：最高人民法院指导案例7号创造了新的程序规则。指导案例7号依托的是审查程序和再审程序彼此分割的审判监督程序结构,反映的是审判监督程序中当事人处分权与检察院抗诉权的关系。在无涉国家利益、社会公共利益和第三人权益的情况下,指导案例7号在审判监督程序中确立了当事人处分权约束检察院抗诉权的规则,在程序的开始和终结方面贯彻了处分权主义。程序法理涵摄裁判理由,裁判理由涵摄裁判要点,裁判要点涵摄裁判结果。通过分析裁判理由和裁判要点的"假定"要素和"处理"要素,组合出了若干类似案件应该参照的情形。立足于一审、二审和再审程序的功能差异,以及民事司法制度的进一步完善,处分权主义在审判监督程序中应该通过该程序的集约化改革而被合理限制。
[Abstract]:The Supreme people's Court directed case 7 to create new procedural rules. The guiding case 7 relies on the structure of the trial supervision procedure, which is divided between the review procedure and the retrial procedure. It reflects the relationship between the right of disposition of the parties and the right of protest of the procuratorate in the procedure of judicial supervision. Where there is no national interest, public interest and the rights and interests of the third party, In the procedure of trial supervision, the guiding case No. 7 establishes the rules of the parties' right of disposition to restrain the procuratorate's right of protest, and implements the doctrine of the right of disposition in the beginning and the end of the procedure, the procedural principle contains the reasons for the judgment, and the reason for the judgment contains the main points of the judgment. By analyzing the factors of "supposition" and "handling" of the reasons and points of the judgment, the author combines some similar cases which should be referred to, based on the functional differences of the first instance, the second instance and the retrial procedure. As well as the further improvement of the civil judicial system, the disposition right doctrine should be reasonably restricted through the intensive reform of this procedure.
【作者单位】：清华大学法学院;
【基金】：北京市教育委员会北京市支持中央在京高校共建研究项目“民事诉讼法修改与多元化争议解决机制的完善”
【分类号】：D926.2

【参考文献】