程序保障视角下诉讼调解既判力分析

发布时间：2018-02-01 02:34

本文关键词： 诉讼调解既判力程序保障再审　出处：《华东政法大学学报》2017年05期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：诉讼调解是否应当具有既判力,关键在于当事人是否获得了充分的程序保障,诉讼调解的效力与程序保障相适应方为正当。我国在未能给予当事人充分程序保障的前提下认可诉讼调解的既判力,将再审设置为唯一的救济途径,抬高了当事人救济的门槛,其正当性本身应予质疑。而且,既判力的赋予在客观上有利于减少司法资源的投入,在案多人少的当下,更易成为强制调解的诱因。而否定既判力有利于形成倒逼机制,通过降低诉讼调解在"节约"司法资源方面的优势,消减强制调解的诱因,进而促进调解的理性回归。
[Abstract]:Whether litigation mediation should have res judicata, the key lies in whether the parties have been given adequate procedural protection. The validity of litigation mediation and procedural protection is just. Our country can not give sufficient procedural protection to the litigants to recognize the res judicata of litigation mediation and set the retrial as the only remedy. Raised the threshold of relief of the parties, its legitimacy itself should be questioned. Moreover, the ex judicata in the objective to reduce the input of judicial resources, on the basis of a small number of people at the moment. It is easier to become the inducement of compulsory mediation. But negating res judicata is conducive to forming the reverse force mechanism. By reducing the advantages of litigation mediation in "saving" judicial resources, we can reduce the inducement of compulsory mediation. And then promote the rational return of mediation.
【作者单位】：国家检察官学院;
【基金】：2016年度国家法治与法学理论研究项目“‘立案登记制’后民事案件受理制度研究”(项目号16SFB3023)的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D925.1
【正文快照】： 目次一、引言二、诉讼调解既判力的不同立场三、诉讼调解既判力的正当性基础四、诉讼调解既判力之否定五、结语一、引言近年来的诉讼调解实践表明,人们所预想的“案结事了”的制度优势并未出现,相反,调解案件呈现出高反悔率、高申请再审率和高进入强制执行率的

【相似文献】