既判力视角下定期金判决变更之诉的解释论展开

发布时间：2018-08-13 17:10

【摘要】：在我国,定期金赔偿已为现行实体法所认可,既判力时间范围也存在着制度依据,在这两个制度框架下,可通过解释论实现定期金判决变更之诉在我国的制度化。定期金赔偿的将来给付属性,决定了判决变更之诉为定期金制度不可或缺的组成部分,也决定了定期金赔偿适用范围的限定性。而诉讼法上形成之诉的属性,决定了定期金判决变更之诉在权利救济体系中的非常性,基于与前诉既判力关系之考量,定期金判决变更之诉在程序启动要件上具有特别性,在审理范围上存有限定性。在理论认知与司法实践中,需要从既判力视角区分定期金判决变更之诉与其他相关诉讼的诉讼法理及适用分野。
[Abstract]:In our country, periodic compensation has been recognized by the current substantive law, and the time range of res judicata also has a system basis. Under the framework of these two systems, we can realize the institutionalization of the action of alteration of periodic gold judgment in our country by means of explanation theory. The nature of future payment of periodic compensation determines that the action of decision modification is an indispensable part of the periodic payment system, and also determines the limitation of the scope of application of periodic compensation. The nature of litigation formed on the procedural law determines the unusual nature of the action for the alteration of periodic gold judgment in the right relief system. Based on the consideration of the relationship between the action and the res judicata of the previous suit, the action of the change of periodic gold judgment is special in the starting elements of the procedure. There are limits on the scope of the trial. In the theoretical cognition and judicial practice, it is necessary to distinguish the litigation principle and application between the change of periodic gold judgment and other related litigation from the perspective of res judicata.
【作者单位】：中央财经大学法学院;
【基金】：2016年国家社科基金一般项目“既判力在我国制度化问题研究”(16BFX080) 中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金项目中央财经大学科研创新团队支持计划
【分类号】：D925.1

【相似文献】