论我国民事判决补正裁定制度的细化

发布时间：2018-01-25 16:25

本文关键词： 民事判决补正裁定笔误显然错误本案事实　出处：《武汉大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》2017年04期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：民事判决始终可能出错,需要通过补正裁定制度更正其中的形式错误。在《民诉解释》出台后,我国仍应进一步完善补正裁定制度,避免实践中的滥用。德国法上对形式错误的补正分别针对显然错误和事实部分错误,在程序上前者可由原先判决的法院或者上诉法院随时依职权补正,后者只能由判决法院在一定期限内依申请补正。与德国制度大致相同,美国法和日本法也规定了判决错误补正制度。我国补正裁定制度应注意上述两种形式错误补正程序的差异。错误显然性应作为判决可以补正的标准,也要考虑补正便利和司法效率。补正裁定制度未来也应适用于案件诉讼经过记录中的错误。
[Abstract]:It is necessary to correct the formal errors through the system of correction and adjudication. After the introduction of the people's lawsuit interpretation, our country should further improve the system of correction and adjudication. Avoid abuse in practice. The correction of form errors in German law is aimed at obvious errors and partial errors of fact respectively. In the procedure, the former can be corrected ex officio by the original judgment court or the appellate court at any time. The latter can only be corrected by the judgment court within a certain period of time upon application, which is roughly the same as the German system. The United States law and Japanese law also stipulate the system of correction of judgment errors. China's system of correction and adjudication should pay attention to the differences between the two forms of error correction procedures. The obvious nature of errors should be regarded as the standard for the correction of judgments. It is also necessary to consider the convenience of correction and the efficiency of the administration of justice. The system of correction and adjudication should also be applied in the future to errors in the record of the proceedings of the case.
【作者单位】：北京大学法学院;
【基金】：国家社会科学基金一般项目(11BFX122)
【分类号】：D925.1
【正文快照】： 一、问题的提出做出完整正确的裁判是司法工作的基本要求。通过案件分流机制遴选出适于通过司法机制解决的纠纷,在审理中加强对双方争点的整理和事实的发现,在裁判时规范和完善裁判文书中的说理,都是现阶段司法改革的重要内容,也是依法治国的重要途径。然而法官做出的裁判可

【参考文献】