私法上之形成权与形成之诉关系考

发布时间：2018-05-11 18:31

本文选题：形成权 + 形成诉讼　；参考：《西南政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：作为实体法与程序法共同作用的场,诉讼不仅涉及到公法与私法的交错,而且是实体权利与程序形式的融合。法制的发展分解了罗马法上的actio,但动态的具体实现却需要整合进这种相互交融的关系。形成诉讼恰处于这种关系的边缘地带。实体法上的形成权被承认以来,便与一些已存的诉讼形式相互印证与支持,形成权成为形成诉讼的权利依据,形成诉讼被视为形成权的行使方式,二者共享塑造法律关系之特点,并且打通了公法与私法、实体与程序之间的隔阂。基于形成权本身之畅快功能以及部门法研究的限制,形成权与形成诉讼具有天然的联系成为自明之理,这对于实体法与诉讼法的学者都是承认的,以至于对形成权与形成诉讼的研究出现了两大部门法均较为忽视的现象。实际上,形成权作为“私法中的权力”,主体之间并不是普通的权利义务关系,权利人之支配与相对人之屈从构成了私法中的不平等领域,是权利人私力救济的手段,与体现公力救济思想的形成诉讼乃两条平行运转的轨迹,形成诉讼自身多有不透明之处,并且对诉讼类型造成了不必要的困惑,其权利依据也需要重新定位,现有的解释框架对此难以做出很好的解释。本文正是从形成权之本质入手,反思形成诉讼的形式标准及实体依据,并对二者之关系进行考察所进行的努力。除引言外,本文分五部分,共五万余字。主要内容如下：第一部分,实体法上形成权之界定。从质疑通说关于形成权概念的形式化之弊切入指出形成权之本质在于对他人权利范围的干涉,相对人处于屈从的法律地位,从而营造了私法中的不平等领域,而公法性质的形成诉权以及与形成权性质存在龃龉的形成抗辩权并不符合形成权的逻辑构造,应当排除出形成权外延范围；第二部分,形成诉讼的生成及展开。本部分考察了形成诉讼获得独立的基础以及其本身存在的诸多问题。形成诉讼在实体权利总结出形成权概念的基础上,在权利保护请求权说的推动下,被认为是出于对特定法益的考量而作出的技术安排,但是这一被视为形成权行使方式的诉讼形式,从确定标准到理论基础均存在着论证不周的情况,有许多未成熟与不透明之处。诉的三分法并非“历史的终点”。第三部分,实体形成权与形成诉讼关系之检讨。基于前述对形成权的认识,其在权利体系中与支配权有着相似的逻辑理路,实为一种单方的支配领域,是权利人的私力救济手段,与诉讼所代表的罗马法的公力救济思想有着本质的差别,形成权与形成诉讼乃毫无干系的两条平行轨迹,前者远较后者更有威慑力,国家因素碍于其统治功用仅有事后审查之地位。第四部分,“形成权”与形成之诉关系再论。本部分对形成抗辩权及其所对抗的权利作了接续处理,既不同于形成权也不是法国法上的形成请求权,而是处在二者中间的位置；而形成诉权并不能独立支撑所谓的形成诉讼,其权利来源应当是一种主观公法权利,由此显现出一个关于“形成”的层次严密权利体系,将后者直接纳入形成诉讼则跨越了一个论证阶段,按照目前的解释框架,形成诉讼与确认诉讼均有不能令人满意的地方。第五部分,理论及实务问题之提示——代结论。通过前文之讨论,得出本文所试图论证的命题,并对今后的研究做一种方向性的提示,对于实务操作以及立法论上的选择作出说明。
[Abstract]:As the field of the joint action of the substantive law and the procedural law, the litigation involves not only the interlacing of public law and private law, but also the integration of substantive rights and procedural forms. The development of the legal system decomposes the actio of the law of Rome, but the concrete realization of the dynamic needs to be integrated into this mutual integration. The formation of a lawsuit is just on the edge of this relationship. Since the right of formation in the substantive law has been recognized, it has been confirmed and supported with some existing litigation forms. The right to form is the basis for the right to form a lawsuit and forms the way to exercise the litigation as the right to form. The two share the characteristics of the legal relationship, and the gap between the public law and the private law, the entity and the procedure. The unblocked function of the right itself and the restriction of the research on the department law, the natural connection between the formation right and the formation of the lawsuit becomes self-evident, which is recognized by the scholars of the substantive law and the procedural law, so that the two major department laws have been neglected in the study of the right to form the right and the formation of the litigation.
In fact, the right of formation, as the power in the private law, is not an ordinary right and obligation relationship between the subjects. The domination of the right person and the relative person's submission constitute the unequal field in the private law, the means of the private relief of the right holders, and the two parallel running tracks with the formation of the public power relief thought, forming a lawsuit self. There are more opaque parts and unnecessary confusion about the type of litigation, and the basis of rights needs to be relocated. The existing interpretation framework is difficult to explain. This paper, starting with the essence of the right of formation, rethinks the form standard and actual basis of the formation of the litigation, and carries out the investigation of the relationship between the two. Hard work.
Besides the introduction, this article is divided into five parts, with a total of 50000 words.
The first part is the definition of the right of formation in the substantive law. From the formalization of the formalization of the concept of the right to form, it points out that the essence of the right of formation lies in the interference in the scope of the rights of others, the relative person is in the legal status of submission, thus creating the inequality in the private law, and the right to form the right to form the public law and the nature of the right to form the right of formation. The right of formation of disagreement does not conform to the logical structure of the right to form, and the scope of the right of formation should be excluded.
In the second part, the formation and expansion of the lawsuit is formed. This part examines the basis for the independence of the formation of litigation and the many problems that exist in itself. On the basis of the concept of the right to form the right to form the substantive rights, and on the impetus of the claim of the right to protect the rights, it is considered to be a technical security for the consideration of the specific legal interest. But this form of litigation, which is regarded as the form of the exercise of the right of formation, has a lot of immature and opaque places from the standard to the theoretical basis. There are many unripe and opaque places. The three point law of the lawsuit is not "the end of history".
The third part, the review of the relationship between the right to form a entity and the formation of a lawsuit. Based on the foregoing knowledge of the right to form, it has a similar logical logic in the right system with the right of domination. It is a unilateral domination field, a means of private relief for the rights of the right, and an essential difference from the public relief thought of the Rome law, represented by the lawsuit. There are two parallel trajectories of the right and the formation of a lawsuit, the former is far more deterrent than the latter, and the state factor is hindering the status of the post censorship of its ruling function only.
The fourth part, "the right to form" and the relationship of the formation of the formation of the relationship again. This part of the formation of the right to defend and the right to fight in succession, not only different from the right of formation and not in French law, but in the middle of the two, and the formation of the right to appeal can not support the so-called formation of litigation, its source of rights should be. When it is a kind of subjective public law right, it shows a hierarchy of strict right system of "formation", and the latter is directly included in the formation of litigation, and it has crossed a stage of demonstration. In accordance with the present interpretation framework, the litigation and the confirmation of litigation are unsatisfactory.
The fifth part, the hint of the theoretical and practical problems - the generation of the conclusion. Through the discussion of the previous article, we can draw the proposition that this article tries to demonstrate, and make a directional hint for the future research, and explain the practical operation and the choice of the legislative theory.

【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D913;D915.2

【参考文献】