论我国民事执行案外人的权利救济

发布时间：2018-02-04 08:29

本文关键词： 民事执行案外人权利救济第三人撤销之诉　出处：《吉林大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：在民事执行工作中，由于执行工作的特点决定了执行工作必须迅速、及时，只能依据外观表象判断执行标的的权属，一般在被执行人占有使用执行标的的情形下即认定其为执行标的物的所有人；另外由于现阶段执行部门工作人员的业务水平参差不齐，导致了执行程序中，案外人权益受到执行机构强制执行行为侵害的情形屡见不鲜。一方面，案外人的合法权益需要保护，另一方面，被执行人的法律义务应该履行。这就需要我国法律体系中要具备完善的案外人救济制度，，使得法律的公平与公正得到实现。司法实践中，随着法律关系的复杂化和多样化，在执行工作中，案外人利用诉讼程序恶意拖延执行的情形越来越多，申请执行人与被执行人在执行程序中恶意串通骗取法院生效裁定，损害第三人合法权益的情形在全国各地均有出现。目前，在我国执行程序中，案外人对执行标的主张实体权利的，可以提出执行异议保护自己的合法权利；当案外人的书面异议被执行机构驳回后，如果与原判决、裁定无关的，可以向执行法院提起执行异议之诉；如果与原判决、裁定有关的，可以申请再审；2012年《民事诉讼法》再次修改又确立了第三人撤销之诉制度。我国现阶段对案外人权益保护提供了多方位的权利救济途径，如何细化和完善现有的制度，使其既能防止恶意拖延执行的发生，又能最大化的发挥职能保护案外人的合法权益，成为现阶段案外人权利救济实务研究方面的重点。本文第一部分介绍了民事执行案外人救济制度的基本问题、历史变迁和演变，从民事执行案外人救济制度的概念、设立的必要性及遵循的原则，民事诉讼法的两次修改着手，对民事执行案外人权利救济制度的现状做出梳理。第二部分分析了我国民事执行案外人权利救济制度的缺陷，对案外人执行异议前置程序、执行异议之诉、案外人申请再审、第三人撤销之诉制度的缺陷分别予以详细阐述；第三部分在比较分析各国及地区，尤其是与我国相近的大陆法系国家对案外人权利救济制度规定的基础上，提出了对我国民事执行案外人权利救济制度的完善构想，建议取消不合理的执行异议前置审查程序，对执行异议之诉制度予以完善，对案外人申请再审制度进行更合理的理论配置，同时对第三人撤销之诉程序进一步细化和厘清。但是考虑目前我国民事执行案外人救济制度设置上多种程序并存的现状，不仅应该着力于对制度的完善，同时应该强调各程序之间的相互衔接，使各程序之间相互配合共同发挥保护案外人合法权益的职能。
[Abstract]:In the civil execution work, because of the characteristics of the execution work, the execution work must be swift and timely, and the ownership of the execution object can only be judged according to the appearance. In general, the subject matter of execution is recognized as the owner of the subject matter of execution if the executor has possession of the object of execution; In addition, due to the uneven operational level of the staff of the executive department at the present stage, it is common to see that the rights and interests of the outsider in the case are infringed by the enforcement agency in the execution procedure. On the one hand. The legitimate rights and interests of the outsider need to be protected, on the other hand, the legal obligations of the executor should be fulfilled. So that the fairness and justice of the law can be realized. In judicial practice, with the complexity and diversification of the legal relationship, in the implementation of the case outsiders use the proceedings to delay the implementation of the situation more and more maliciously. Application executor and the executor in the execution procedure maliciously colluding to obtain the court effective ruling, damage the legitimate rights and interests of the third party has appeared in all parts of the country. At present, in the execution procedure in our country. If an outsider claims substantive rights to the object of execution, he may raise an executive objection to protect his legal rights; When the written objection of an outsider to the case is rejected by the enforcement agency, if it has nothing to do with the original judgment or ruling, it may file an enforcement objection action with the enforcement court; If it is related to the original judgment or ruling, it may apply for retrial; In 2012, the Civil procedure Law again amended and established the system of third party revocation. At this stage, our country provides a multi-faceted right relief way for the protection of the rights and interests of outsiders in the case, and how to refine and improve the existing system. It can not only prevent the maliciously delaying the execution but also maximize the function of protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the outsider in the case. It has become the focus of the practical research on the right relief of the outsider at the present stage. The first part of this paper introduces the basic problems, historical changes and evolution of the external relief system of civil execution cases, the concept of the external relief system of civil execution cases, the necessity of setting up and the principles to be followed. The second part analyzes the defects of the remedy system of the rights of outsiders in civil enforcement cases. The defects of the system of dissent by the third party shall be elaborated in detail on the basis of the prior procedure of the dissent, the execution of the dissenting action, the application for retrial of the outsider, and the revocation of the action by the third party. The third part of the comparative analysis of countries and regions, especially similar to China's civil law countries on the basis of the relief system of the rights of the foreign parties to the case on the basis of the provisions. This paper puts forward the idea of perfecting the relief system of the rights of outsiders in civil enforcement cases in our country, and proposes to abolish the unreasonable procedure of pre-examination of executive dissent, and to perfect the system of action of execution dissent. A more reasonable theoretical allocation of the system of application for retrial is carried out. At the same time, the procedure of the third party revocation is further refined and clarified. However, considering the existing situation of a variety of procedures on the establishment of the external relief system of civil execution cases in China, we should not only focus on the perfection of the system. At the same time, we should emphasize the connection of each procedure, make each procedure cooperate with each other and jointly play the function of protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the outsider in the case.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.1

【相似文献】