论民事有限三审终审制在我国的构建

发布时间：2018-06-02 19:15

本文选题：有限三审 + 两审终审　；参考：《辽宁大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：由于目前我国现行的审级制度的基础是两审终审制,对民事有限三审终审制还没有一个具体的定义,国外实行三审终审制已经相当成熟,通过研究域外审级制度,可以把民事诉讼有限三审终审制定义为不服第二审法院所作出的判决的当事人期待权威性的判决就法律问题提起的第二次上诉,在上诉审法院经过阅卷,初步审查上诉案件以后,认为该案件不是只关乎当事人的私人利益,而是涉及重要的法律适用问题,抑或是经过审判后能具有普遍的指导性意义的案件,在这个条件下受理当事人的上诉,经过组成专业合议庭书面审理上诉案件的一个审级制度。与两审终审制的全面审查原则不同,在有限三审终审制度下,第三审法院只就上诉案件判决所适用的法律是否具有正当性合法性进行重点审查,二次上诉案件的事实问题部分则不在第三审法院审查的范围之内。能够实现法律问题和事实问题在第三审层面上的分离是因为第三审一个显著特征就是注重普遍案件的法律适用统一而非实现个案公正。这样做的目的能够让第三审即终审法院的法官把有限的精力放在对法律问题的思考上,从而让第三审法官在法律问题而非案件事实的司法判断上更有了客观、坚实的基础。之所以要建立有限三审终审制度,是现行审级制度已经不能满足案件类型多元化趋势,更不能确保法律适用的统一和生效裁判的权威性。能够进入到第三审的案件数量很少,因为第三审的上诉条件较为严格,法律审的性质定位使得能够进入到三审法院的案件只能是具有普遍指导性意义的法律问题案件。法学理论界已经对这一程序制度研究多年,也形成了不少具有价值型的研究成果。法律实务界在办案过程中也积累了大量的有益经验,对我国的民事诉讼审级制度改革呼声日益高涨,这为有限三审终审制度在我国的建立提供了坚实的理论和实践基础。关于如何构建我国的有限三审终审制度,笔者结合理论与实践,主要从案件类型即标的额和上诉理由是法律问题还是事实问题,是个案抑或具有普遍性的案件和上诉提请主体、引起方式和决定程序,审查和审理方式以及法院职能的重构等方面进行详细论述。有限三审制终审制度的建立并不是废除两审终审制,而是在以现行审级制度的基础上有条件的实行三审制度,实质上是审级的多元化。
[Abstract]:Because the current trial grade system in our country is based on the two-instance final appeal system, and there is no specific definition of the civil limited third instance final appeal system, the implementation of the third instance final appeal system in foreign countries is already quite mature. Through the study of the extraterritorial trial grade system, We can define the limited third instance system of civil action as the second appeal of an authoritative judgment filed by a party who does not accept a judgment made by the court of second instance, and has been reviewed by the appellate court. After a preliminary examination of the appeal case, it was concluded that the case was not only concerned with the private interests of the parties, but involved important questions of the application of the law, or a case of general guiding significance after trial, Under this condition, the appeal of the parties is accepted, and the appellate case is heard in writing by a professional collegial panel. Different from the principle of comprehensive review of the two-instance system of final appeal, under the system of limited third instance, the court of third instance only focuses on whether the law applicable to the judgment of an appeal case has legitimacy or not. The question of fact part of the second appeal case is outside the scope of examination by the third instance court. The separation of legal and factual issues at the third instance level can be realized because a prominent feature of the third instance is that it pays more attention to the unification of the application of the law in general cases rather than to the realization of case justice. The purpose of this way is to make the judges of the third instance, that is, the Court of final Appeal, devote their limited energy to the consideration of legal issues, thus giving the third instance judges a more objective and solid basis in the judicial judgment of legal issues rather than the facts of the case. The reason why it is necessary to establish the limited third instance final appeal system is that the current trial grade system can no longer meet the diversified trend of case types, and can not ensure the unification of the application of the law and the authority of the effective adjudication. The number of cases that can enter the third instance is very small, because the appeal condition of the third instance is more strict, and the nature of the legal trial makes the case that can enter the court of third instance can only be a legal case with general guiding significance. The legal theorists have studied this procedure for many years and formed many valuable research results. The legal practice also accumulates a lot of beneficial experience in the course of handling cases, which provides a solid theoretical and practical basis for the establishment of the limited third instance final appeal system in our country. As to how to construct the limited third instance final appeal system in our country, the author combines the theory and practice, mainly from the case type, that is, the object amount and the appeal reason is a legal question or a fact problem, is a case or a universal case and appeals to the subject. The causes and the procedure of decision, the way of examination and trial, and the reconstruction of the court's function are discussed in detail. The establishment of the limited three-instance system is not the abolition of the two-instance system, but the conditional implementation of the three-instance system on the basis of the current system.
【学位授予单位】：辽宁大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D925.1

【参考文献】