法院调解担保制度研究

发布时间：2018-04-16 20:34

本文选题：法院调解 + 法院调解担保　；参考：《湘潭大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：法院调解担保制度来源于《最高人民法院关于人民法院民事调解工作若干问题的规定》第十一条的规定，是指在法院调解过程中，当事人可以约定由一方当事人自己提供担保或者由案外人提供担保，从而促成调解协议的达成，保障调解的顺利进行。由于调解协议可以申请强制执行，从表面上看使得法院调解担保制度显得多此一举。其实不然，强制执行是一种事后救济，而法院调解担保制度则侧重于事前保障。在实践中，不履行调解协议的案件也时有发生，因此债权人一方多有迟疑，法院调解担保制度便是为了让债权人消除这种顾虑而产生的。它是完善法院调解制度的措施之一，而法院调解是一种重要的化解纠纷的方式，是法院调解担保制度得以存在的大前提。但现阶段法院调解担保制度由于其相关规定甚少，因此常常不被关注。虽然不被关注，其意义与价值却不容忽视。法院调解担保制度不仅扩大了责任财产的范围从而保护债权人权益，也通过担保为债务人赢得了宝贵的时间。不仅提高了调解的效率，而且对调解能够真正化解纠纷起到重要作用。就其制度本身而言，，也实现了实体法与程序法的有机融合。所以，法院调解担保制度有其存在的价值与意义。在司法实践中，法院调解担保则更多的是具备实体法上的内涵，尤其是多种担保并存时该如何处理的情形更是如此。在实践中，仅有抵押、质押、保证三种担保方式适用于法院调解担保，因留置具有法定性，定金具有合同性质所以并不适用于该制度。尽管相关的实体法规定有助于解决法院调解担保制度运用中的实际问题，但法院调解担保制度仍不可避免地出现了各种弊端，这是因为该制度在我国确立不久，司法实践不够，加之法条的规定过于粗糙，从而造成实践中想用却难以操作的尴尬处境。这些问题主要集中表现为：担保人的诉讼地位以及救济途径不确定、调解协议生效时间与担保生效时间不一致、法院应当具备的审查义务不明等。本文在总结归纳学者们研究成果的同时，也根据2012年《民事诉讼法》新增的相关条文对法院调解担保制度进行了新的初步探讨。
[Abstract]:The guarantee system for court mediation derives from the provisions of Article 11 of the provisions of the Supreme people's Court on certain issues concerning Civil Mediation in the people's Court, and refers to the process of mediation in the court,The parties may agree that one party shall provide the guarantee by itself or the outsider of the case, thereby facilitating the conclusion of the mediation agreement and ensuring the smooth progress of the mediation.Because mediation agreement can be applied for enforcement, on the surface, court mediation guarantee system appears superfluous.In fact, enforcement is a kind of ex post relief, and court mediation guarantee system focuses on prior protection.In practice, the failure to perform the conciliation agreement also happens from time to time, so the creditor has much hesitation, the court mediation security system is to let the creditor eliminate this concern.It is one of the measures to perfect the court mediation system, and court mediation is an important way to resolve disputes and the premise of the existence of court mediation guarantee system.However, the court mediation guarantee system is often ignored because of its few regulations.Although not paid attention to, its significance and value can not be ignored.The court mediation security system not only expands the scope of the liable property to protect the creditor's rights and interests, but also gains the debtor valuable time through the guarantee.It not only improves the efficiency of mediation, but also plays an important role in resolving disputes.As far as its system itself is concerned, it also realizes the organic fusion of substantive law and procedural law.Therefore, the court mediation guarantee system has its existence value and significance.In judicial practice, the court mediation guarantee has the connotation of substantive law, especially how to deal with the coexistence of multiple guarantees.In practice, only mortgage, pledge and guarantee are applicable to the court mediation guarantee, but the deposit is not applicable to the system because the lien is legally qualified and the deposit has the nature of contract.Although the relevant substantive law provisions are helpful to solve the practical problems in the application of the court mediation guarantee system, the court mediation guarantee system still inevitably has a variety of drawbacks, which is because the system has not been established in our country, and the judicial practice is not enough.In addition, the provisions of the law are too rough, resulting in an awkward situation in practice.These problems mainly focus on the uncertainty of the surety's litigation status and remedies, the inconsistency between the effective time of the mediation agreement and the effective time of the guarantee, the unclear obligation of the court to examine and so on.While summing up the research results of scholars, this paper also makes a new preliminary discussion on the court mediation guarantee system according to the new articles in the Civil procedure Law of 2012.
【学位授予单位】：湘潭大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.1

【参考文献】