民事诉讼义务配置理论研究

发布时间：2018-04-28 12:05

本文选题：民事诉讼 + 诉讼义务　；参考：《湘潭大学》2014年博士论文

【摘要】：在民事诉讼理论研究中，诉讼义务一直以来均不受重视，，在价值层面上往往被视为权利的对立物或者权力的同等物而遭到排斥，诉讼权利权力配置的核心地位往往导致对诉讼义务的漠视，而在当事人义务与负担、法院义务与职责等问题上的纠结则严重困扰着对诉讼义务的理论研究。而在片面注重法院职权干预或个人自由的传统民事诉讼中，诉讼义务在立法上也似乎完全可为权利和权力规范所涵盖替代而可有可无。然而，随着时代变迁与民事诉讼的改革发展，在坚持当事人自主自治的前提下注重对法院职能作用的适当发挥的基本格局日渐清晰，民事诉讼主体结构关系已由过去的当事人与法院之间的双边关系转变为双方当事人与法院三方之间的三角结构，伴随着权限分配而来的诉讼责任分担问题亦随之凸显。在此背景下，对诉讼主体的行为调整也应当采取自由赋予和义务制约两条主线相结合，在民事诉讼程序构建上也应当摒弃仅仅注重当事人诉讼权利和法院权力的二元论思维，“认真对待诉讼义务”，重视诉讼义务的独立价值。从域外发达国家民事诉讼中对于法院权力的调整来看，其真正重心在于强调法院应尽的责任与义务，通过法院的提示和对话交流促进诉讼公平和裁判可接受性，但以尊重当事人自主意愿为基础；对当事人的诉讼义务设置，则是以兼顾并平等保障双方程序利益、维护双方共同需求和营造理性商谈的氛围和基础为核心。为此，在关注诉讼权利与法院权力配置的同时，也应重视对当事人义务与法院义务的同步合理配置，以及诉讼义务配置的正当性与合理性。根据民事诉讼的程序性本质，诉讼程序设计应当以促进主体间的论辩和交涉对话得以理性而充分地展开为直接目标，并同步合理配置相关诉讼义务；在诉讼义务的具体配置上，应当有利于促进当事人诉讼权利充分行使和获取充分而真实的相关信息，引导诉讼主体理性而为，从而维护诉讼公平；法院职能作用的发挥，应当以义务为重心，通过权力义务化和具体化来规制权力正当行使，并促进其与当事人之间的信息交换充分展开，进而实现对当事人诉讼能力不足的补偿和对双方悬殊的矫正，促进诉讼公平、诉讼效率和确保对双方当事人的平等保障与对社会公众的同等保障。就我国而言，在法院权力行使的自由度依旧过大、诉讼权利仍然虚化的现实背景下，我国未来的民事诉讼改革仍然应当坚持以强化当事人自主自治为基本方向，同时适当发挥法院的职能作用和强化对当事人诉讼行为的合理引导，但这又应以对当事人诉讼义务与法院义务的同步合理配置为基本路径。
[Abstract]:In the study of the theory of civil action, the obligation of action has always been ignored, which is often regarded as the opposite of right or the equivalent of power on the value level. The core position of the disposition of litigation right power often leads to the disregard of litigation obligation, while the entanglement of party obligation and burden, court obligation and duty seriously puzzles the theoretical study of litigation obligation. However, in the traditional civil action which pays one-sided attention to the intervention of court authority or individual freedom, the litigation obligation can be completely replaced by rights and power norms in legislation. However, with the change of the times and the reform and development of civil litigation, the basic pattern of paying attention to the function of the court under the premise of insisting on the autonomy of the parties becomes clear day by day. The relationship between the subject structure of civil action has changed from the bilateral relationship between the parties and the court to the triangular structure between the parties and the court. Under this background, the behavior adjustment of the litigant should also adopt the combination of the two main lines of free endow and obligation restriction, and abandon the dualistic thinking of only paying attention to the litigant's litigation right and the court power in the construction of the civil procedure. "take litigation obligation seriously" and attach importance to the independent value of litigation obligation. From the perspective of the adjustment of the court power in civil proceedings in developed countries, the real focus is to emphasize the duties and obligations of the court, and to promote the fairness and acceptability of the proceedings through the prompt and dialogue of the court. But on the basis of respecting the independent will of the parties, the establishment of the litigant obligation of the parties is based on the consideration and equal protection of the procedural interests of both parties, the maintenance of the common needs of both parties and the creation of an atmosphere and basis for rational negotiation. Therefore, while paying attention to the allocation of litigation rights and court power, we should also pay attention to the simultaneous and reasonable allocation of the parties' obligations and the court obligations, as well as the legitimacy and reasonableness of the disposition of the litigation obligations. According to the procedural nature of the civil action, the procedural design of the litigation procedure should aim at promoting the rational and sufficient dialogue between the subjects and the rational disposition of the relevant litigation obligations. It should help to promote the full exercise of the litigant's litigation rights and obtain the full and true relevant information, guide the subject of litigation to act rationally, and thus safeguard the fairness of the litigation; the function of the court should be given priority to the duty, and the function of the court should be brought into full play. To regulate the proper exercise of power through the power obligation and concretization, and to promote the exchange of information between the parties and the parties, so as to realize the compensation for the lack of litigant capacity and the correction of the disparity between the two parties, and to promote the fairness of the litigation. Litigation efficiency and ensure equal protection for both parties and the public. As far as our country is concerned, under the background that the freedom of the exercise of court power is still too large and the litigation right is still empty, the future civil litigation reform in our country should still adhere to the basic direction of strengthening the autonomous autonomy of the parties. At the same time, the function of the court should be properly brought into play and the reasonable guidance to the litigants' actions should be strengthened, but this should be based on the synchronous and reasonable allocation of the litigant's litigation obligations and the court's obligations.
【学位授予单位】：湘潭大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.1

【参考文献】