再审与原判决既判力之关系研究
发布时间：2018-09-04 11:39
【摘要】：再审程序是对确定判决进行再审理，大多数人将再审程序对有既判力的判决再审理视为理所当然，而如果深究便会发现两者的悖论。确定判决存在着既判力，法院及当事人均受到既判力的拘束，不得声明不服，不得再为审理。因此，对确定判决进行再审，势必要解除原判决既判力的拘束，但是根据目前大陆法系各个国家地区的立法现状，原判决的撤销是在作出再审裁判时一并作出的。本文将解释为何再审可以对有既判力的确定判决进行再审理。如何解除确定判决的既判力，再审程序存在三个阶段，既判力的解除到底是在哪个阶段，将是论述的重点。 第一部分，既判力与再审的概述。简要介绍既判力的积极作用和消极作用，，再审的程序构造及再审之诉的诉讼标的，指明本文所支持的观点，为后文进一步论述做铺垫。 第二部分，再审事由与原判决既判力正当性的关系。德国法上将再审事由分成无效事由和回复原状事由，本文从再审事由的分类角度，比较研究再审事由对原判决既判力正当性的影响的有关学说，从而得出为何可以对存在既判力的原判决进行再审理。认定再审事由并不意味着撤销原判决，因为再审事由的存在说明原确定判决存在程序上或实体上的瑕疵，有损其既判力的正当性。再审事由对原判决既判力的正当性是直接否定还是降低其价值，须根据再审事由的分类进行判断。无效事由直接否定原判决既判力的正当性，原判决溯及性的无效。存在回复原状事由的原判决可以通过解除既判力的消极作用，使得当事人可以再次争取正当权益，法官可以再次受理争议。从而得出再审事由在再审程序中的起到再审理事由的作用。 第三部分，再审理阶段原判决既判力的状态。法院认定存在再审事由，从而进入本案再审理阶段，那么此时原判决既判力是处于何种状态，有效还是无效，日本学界存在着效力暂定说和效力确定说。这两种学说观点与再审事由的作用、再审之诉的诉讼标的问题存在着重要关系。本文从再审事由审理阶段对原判决既判力的形成性影响角度切入，提出存在无效事由的原判决既判力处于无效状态，而回复原状事由的原判决只有审查认定该事由与原判决既判力的不当存在因果关系时，才能撤销原判决，即解除原判决既判力的积极作用。 第四部分，我国的再审与原判决既判力的现状及协调。由于我国的再审制度与大陆法系的再审之诉不同，我国的再审程序启动主体有三类，即检察院、法院及当事人。本文分别三类主体对我国的再审程序构造、再审事由以及具体程序与原判决既判力的处理存在的问题提出完善建议。
[Abstract]:The retrial procedure is to rehear the certain judgment. Most people take the retrial procedure as a matter of course for the res judicata judgment, but if we go deep into it, we will find the paradox between the two. The court and the parties are bound by res judicata. Therefore, it is necessary to release the jus judicata of the original judgment, but according to the current legislative situation of various countries in the civil law system, the revocation of the original judgment was made at the same time when the retrial decision was made. This article will explain why a retrial can rehear a definitive decision with res judicata. There are three stages in the procedure of retrial. The first part, the summary of res judicata and retrial. This paper briefly introduces the positive and negative effects of res judicata, the procedural structure of retrial and the litigation object of retrial, and points out the viewpoints supported in this paper, which will pave the way for further discussion. The second part, the relationship between the reason of retrial and the validity of res judicata. The German law divides the retrial cause into invalid cause and restitution reason. From the classification of retrial reasons, this paper compares and studies the influence of retrial cause on the validity of the res judicata of the original judgment. So we can find out why the original judgment with res judicata can be tried again. Finding the reason of retrial does not mean rescission of the original judgment, because the existence of the reason of retrial indicates that the original judgment has defects in procedure or substance, which impairs the legitimacy of its res judicata. Whether the justification of the res judicata of the original judgment is directly negated or reduced by the reason of retrial should be judged according to the classification of the reason of retrial. The reason of invalidity directly negates the validity of the res judicata of the original judgment and the invalidity of the retroactivity of the original judgment. The existence of the original judgment in reply to the original situation can relieve the negative effect of res judicata, so that the parties can fight for the legitimate rights and interests again, and the judge can accept the dispute again. So that the retrial cause in the retrial proceedings play the role of retrial reason. The third part, the state of res judicata in the stage of retrial. The court found that there is a reason for retrial, thus entering the stage of retrial of the case, so at this time whether the res judicata of the original judgment is in what state, effective or invalid, there is a tentative theory of validity and a theory of determination of validity in Japanese academic circles. There is an important relationship between these two views and the cause of retrial and the subject matter of retrial action. From the point of view of the formative influence of the retrial trial on the res judicata of the original judgment, the author puts forward that the res judicata of the original judgment with invalid reasons is in an invalid state. Only when the original judgment of reply to the original circumstances determines that there is a causal relationship between the reason and the res judicata, can the original judgment be revoked, that is, the positive effect of the original judgment on res judicata. The fourth part, our country's retrial and the original judgment res judicata present situation and the coordination. Because the retrial system of our country is different from that of the civil law system, there are three kinds of subjects to start the retrial procedure in our country, that is, the procuratorate, the court and the parties concerned. This paper puts forward some suggestions on the construction of retrial procedure, the cause of retrial and the problems in dealing with the res judicata of the specific procedure and the original judgment.
【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】：D925.1
本文编号：2221986
[Abstract]:The retrial procedure is to rehear the certain judgment. Most people take the retrial procedure as a matter of course for the res judicata judgment, but if we go deep into it, we will find the paradox between the two. The court and the parties are bound by res judicata. Therefore, it is necessary to release the jus judicata of the original judgment, but according to the current legislative situation of various countries in the civil law system, the revocation of the original judgment was made at the same time when the retrial decision was made. This article will explain why a retrial can rehear a definitive decision with res judicata. There are three stages in the procedure of retrial. The first part, the summary of res judicata and retrial. This paper briefly introduces the positive and negative effects of res judicata, the procedural structure of retrial and the litigation object of retrial, and points out the viewpoints supported in this paper, which will pave the way for further discussion. The second part, the relationship between the reason of retrial and the validity of res judicata. The German law divides the retrial cause into invalid cause and restitution reason. From the classification of retrial reasons, this paper compares and studies the influence of retrial cause on the validity of the res judicata of the original judgment. So we can find out why the original judgment with res judicata can be tried again. Finding the reason of retrial does not mean rescission of the original judgment, because the existence of the reason of retrial indicates that the original judgment has defects in procedure or substance, which impairs the legitimacy of its res judicata. Whether the justification of the res judicata of the original judgment is directly negated or reduced by the reason of retrial should be judged according to the classification of the reason of retrial. The reason of invalidity directly negates the validity of the res judicata of the original judgment and the invalidity of the retroactivity of the original judgment. The existence of the original judgment in reply to the original situation can relieve the negative effect of res judicata, so that the parties can fight for the legitimate rights and interests again, and the judge can accept the dispute again. So that the retrial cause in the retrial proceedings play the role of retrial reason. The third part, the state of res judicata in the stage of retrial. The court found that there is a reason for retrial, thus entering the stage of retrial of the case, so at this time whether the res judicata of the original judgment is in what state, effective or invalid, there is a tentative theory of validity and a theory of determination of validity in Japanese academic circles. There is an important relationship between these two views and the cause of retrial and the subject matter of retrial action. From the point of view of the formative influence of the retrial trial on the res judicata of the original judgment, the author puts forward that the res judicata of the original judgment with invalid reasons is in an invalid state. Only when the original judgment of reply to the original circumstances determines that there is a causal relationship between the reason and the res judicata, can the original judgment be revoked, that is, the positive effect of the original judgment on res judicata. The fourth part, our country's retrial and the original judgment res judicata present situation and the coordination. Because the retrial system of our country is different from that of the civil law system, there are three kinds of subjects to start the retrial procedure in our country, that is, the procuratorate, the court and the parties concerned. This paper puts forward some suggestions on the construction of retrial procedure, the cause of retrial and the problems in dealing with the res judicata of the specific procedure and the original judgment.
【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】：D925.1
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前3条
1 李浩;;构建再审之诉的三个程序设计[J];法商研究;2006年04期
2 齐树洁;;再审程序的完善与既判力之维护[J];法学家;2007年06期
3 谭振波;既判力理论与我国民事诉讼法中审判监督程序的冲突及解决途径[J];河北法学;2003年01期
相关博士学位论文 前1条
1 崔玲玲;诉的类型研究[D];西南政法大学;2012年
本文编号：2221986
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/susongfa/2221986.html
