论我国执行和解协议救济机制的完善

发布时间：2018-03-07 16:13

本文选题：执行和解协议　切入点：私法自治　出处：《甘肃社会科学》2017年03期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：我国立法和司法实务对执行和解协议的救济机制存在差异。《民事诉讼法》第230条第2款规定了可以申请恢复执行原生效法律文书的条件,但我国司法实务却一般将其处理为只能申请恢复执行原生效法律文书。后者的处理直接导致了违约不必付出代价的后果。对此,应当按照立法思路完善救济机制:第一,债务人违约时,不管原生效法律文书的申请执行期间是否届满都赋予债权人以选择权--申请恢复执行原生效法律文书或者基于执行和解协议提起新诉;同时允许执行法官主持下达成的执行和解通过司法确认程序赋予和解协议以强制执行力。第二,构建债务人异议之诉制度。第三,延长申请执行期间。
[Abstract]:There are differences between the legislation and judicial practice of our country in respect of the relief mechanism for the enforcement of the settlement agreement. Article 230, paragraph 2, of the Code of Civil procedure stipulates the conditions under which an application may be made for the reinstatement of the original legal instrument in force. However, the judicial practice of our country generally treats it as only applying for the reinstatement of the original effective legal instrument. The latter directly leads to the consequences of not having to pay the price for breach of contract. To this end, we should perfect the relief mechanism according to the legislative thinking: first, When the debtor defaults, whether or not the period of application for enforcement of the original effective legal instrument expires, the creditor is given the option to apply for reinstatement of the original effective legal instrument or to file a new complaint based on the enforcement settlement agreement; At the same time, the enforcement settlement reached under the auspices of the enforcement judge is allowed to enforce the settlement agreement through judicial confirmation procedures. Second, the system of dissenting action of the debtor is constructed. Thirdly, the period of application for enforcement is extended.
【作者单位】：中国青年政治学院法学院;
【基金】：2014年中国教育部第48批留学回国人员科研启动基金“执行和解协议的救济机制研究”(教外司留[2014]1685) 中国青年政治学院2015年校级青年教师学术创新支持计划项目“一审判决与二审诉外和解协议的效力冲突研究——兼评最高人民法院2号指导案例”(182070208)的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D925.1

【相似文献】