群体性纠纷解决中的示范诉讼制度探析

发布时间：2018-05-07 08:33

本文选题：群体性纠纷 + 示范诉讼　；参考：《山东大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：随着社会转型以及利益格局调整,社会矛盾呈现出主体多元、数量多发、诉求多样的发展态势,愈来愈多的权利义务关系与矛盾纠纷以群体案件的形式进入司法领域。目前,群体性纠纷已成我国亟需解决的痼疾之一,群体性事件时常见诸报端,毋须讳言,公民对于司法的需求以及公正的期待日益增强,而且群体纠纷案件解决的效率与质量,亦是考验我国各级政府以及司法机关的试金石与绳墨航标。世界诸多国家也都逐步构建了群体纠纷的解决机制,20世纪初德国的司法实践逐步兴起了示范诉讼制度,并被诸多国家借鉴移植。我国在1991年《民事诉讼法》中制定了代表人诉讼制度,但是,反观二十多年的司法实践,代表人诉讼制度几乎被束之高阁,践行效用有限,并没有取得预期效果。因此,如何及时高效地解决群体纠纷、如何减少抑或提起预防群体侵权案件的发生、如何持续弥补优化现有的群体纠纷化解机制、如何借鉴示范诉讼制度、如何切实实现法律效果与社会效果的有效统一,凡此诸多现实症结正日益逼近各国政府与司法实务界以及法学理论研究者。本文主要包括四部分,第一部分主要是对示范诉讼制度的概念、特征、类型、理论基础以及价值等基本内容进行了详实阐述。第二部分主要是对示范诉讼制度与群体纠纷案件的其他诉讼制度进行了细致的比较分析。第三部分主要是以美国、英国、德国以及日本的示范诉讼制度进行了考证梳理,以此明晰不同国家关于示范诉讼制度具体规定与司法实践的现实运行规律。第四部分首先分析了我国目前解决群体纠纷案件的现状以及代表人诉讼制度与示范诉讼制度在我国司法实务中的适用状况,然后阐述了我国构建优化示范诉讼制度的必要性与可行性,在此基础上并探索性地提出了我国构建示优化范诉讼制度的些许具体建议抑或司法措施,希冀通过构建多元纠纷解决机制,统筹法律规定、司法实践以及社情民意,号准案件切入点,做好群众工作,攻坚克难,逐步破解群体纠纷难题,并以此可以逐步切实地对我国在群体纠纷解决层面的司法实践有所微观助推抑或些许的理论裨益。本文可能突破之处在于针对我国构建示优化范诉讼制度所提的的些许具体建议抑或司法措施,但其合理性以及可操作性仍需探讨与司法实践检验。
[Abstract]:With the social transformation and the adjustment of the interest pattern, the social contradiction presents the development trend of the main body pluralism, the quantity is many, the demand is diverse, more and more rights and obligations relations and disputes enter the judicial field in the form of group cases. At present, group disputes have become one of the chronic diseases that need to be solved in our country. Mass incidents often appear in the newspapers. Needless to say, citizens' demand for justice and their expectations for justice are increasing day by day, and the efficiency and quality of resolving group disputes cases are also increasing. Is also a test of all levels of government and judicial organs of the touchstone and ink navigation marks. Many countries in the world have gradually constructed a mechanism for resolving group disputes. In the early 20th century, the judicial practice of Germany gradually rose a model litigation system, and was transplanted by many countries. In 1991, our country established the representative litigation system in the Civil procedure Law. However, after more than 20 years of judicial practice, the representative litigation system is almost shelved, the effectiveness of the practice is limited, and it has not achieved the expected results. Therefore, how to solve group disputes in a timely and efficient manner, how to reduce or raise the prevention of group infringement cases, how to continuously make up for and optimize the existing mechanism of resolving group disputes, how to learn from the model litigation system, How to realize the effective unification of the legal effect and the social effect is approaching the governments of various countries, the judicial practice circle and the researchers of the legal theory day by day. This paper mainly includes four parts. The first part is to elaborate the concept, characteristics, types, theoretical basis and value of the model litigation system. The second part mainly analyzes the model litigation system and other litigation systems of group dispute cases. The third part is mainly based on the United States, Britain, Germany and Japan model litigation system for textual research, in order to clarify the specific provisions of different countries on the model litigation system and judicial practice of the actual operation of the law. The fourth part first analyzes the current situation of solving group disputes in China and the application of representative litigation system and model litigation system in the judicial practice of our country. Then it expounds the necessity and feasibility of constructing and optimizing the model litigation system in our country, and then puts forward some concrete suggestions or judicial measures to construct the model litigation system of our country. It is hoped that through the establishment of a pluralistic dispute resolution mechanism, the overall planning of legal provisions, judicial practice and social sentiment and public opinion, the entry point for the registration of cases, to do a good job of mass work, to overcome difficulties, and to gradually solve the difficult problems of group disputes, In this way, we can gradually and practically contribute to the judicial practice in the level of group dispute resolution or some theoretical benefits. The possible breakthrough of this paper lies in some concrete suggestions or judicial measures for constructing the system of demonstration and optimization of normal litigation in our country, but its rationality and maneuverability still need to be explored and tested in judicial practice.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.1

【参考文献】