论民事诉讼被告答辩制度的完善

发布时间：2018-10-25 19:37

【摘要】：答辩是当事人自然拥有的诉讼权利，具有独立的程序价值。但是，答辩在我国现行诉讼制度中并未受到重视，立法对于答辩权的行使缺乏刚性约束，不利于被告积极行使答辩权。现代民事诉讼越来越强调诉讼正义的效益化因此，为了实现集中审理，当事人应当积极迅速地提出攻击防御方法，这对我国传统民事诉讼审理答辩制度提出了更多的现实要求。笔者在此文中首先对答辩状的内涵进行了界定。笔者认为所谓答辩状，就是被告和被上诉人针对起诉的事实和理由或上诉的请求和理由进行回答和辩解的文书。它是与诉状和上诉状相对应的文书。答辩状应当重点答辩事实的认定、法律的适用和程序的合法等三个方面。笔者支持新权利说对提交答辩状的性质中的观点，认为提交答辩状依然是被告的一项权利，但是需要对其权利行使加以约束。同时，笔者对答辩状的功能进行了分析，提出了答辩状具有明确争点、防止诉讼突袭、证据开示程序的准备、法官裁判的基础等四项功能。解决了答辩状是何物，答辩状有何用问题。接下来，笔者从答辩失权之界定、答辩失权制度的法理基础两个方面，对答辩失权制度的基本理论进行了梳理。再介绍了英国、美国、法国、台湾等国家和地区，，目前法律中关于对答辩失权制度的一些规定，对这些国家和地区答辩失权制度的评析。并从立法、司法两个方面对我国目前的答辩失权制度的运行状况进行了介绍，分析了认为，我国目前不完善的答辩制度是由于立法的不完善、传统诉讼文化的影响和诉讼策略考虑的结果，并提出了一些反思。最后，笔者提出了我国民事诉讼答辩失权制度的构建的可行性进行了分析。并从适用范围、适用主体、答辩期间的规定，答辩状内容的具体要素，以及不答辩的后果，答辩失权的例外适用、不应诉判决的救济途径等方面对我国民事诉讼答辩失权制度提出了具体的构建。文章最后，笔者提出了保障答辩失权制度实施的在我国民事诉讼法中确立诚实信用原则等四项保障措施。
[Abstract]:The defense is the litigant's natural right, and has the independent procedure value. However, the defense has not been paid much attention in the current litigation system of our country, and the legislation lacks rigid restriction on the exercise of the right of reply, which is not conducive to the defendant's active exercise of the right of reply. In order to realize the centralized trial, the parties should actively and quickly put forward the defense method of attack, which puts forward more practical requirements to the traditional defense system of civil litigation in our country. In this article, the author first defines the connotation of the reply. The author holds that the so-called rejoinder is an instrument by which the defendant and the appellant answer and defend the facts and grounds of the suit or the request and reason of the appeal. It is an instrument corresponding to the pleadings and appeals. The reply should focus on the recognition of the facts, the application of the law and the legality of the procedure. The author supports the view of the nature of the filing of the reply, and holds that the filing of the reply is still a right of the defendant, but the exercise of the right should be restricted. At the same time, the author analyzes the function of answering pleadings, and points out that the reply pleadings have four functions: clear points of contention, prevention of litigation raids, preparation of evidence discovery procedures, and basis of judges' adjudication. The question of what the rejoinder is and what is the use of the reply has been solved. Next, the author combs the basic theory of the system of the loss of the right of reply from two aspects: the definition of the right of reply and the legal basis of the system of the loss of the right of reply. Then introduces the United Kingdom, the United States, France, Taiwan and other countries and regions, the current law on the system of the loss of the right of defense provisions, to these countries and regions of the system of comment. And from the legislative and judicial aspects, this paper introduces the current operation of the system of the loss of the right of defense in China, and analyzes that the imperfect defense system of our country is due to the imperfect legislation. The influence of traditional litigation culture and the result of consideration of litigation strategy are put forward. Finally, the author analyzes the feasibility of the construction of the system of civil action loss of defense. And from the scope of application, the subject of application, the provisions of the defense period, the specific elements of the contents of the reply, as well as the consequences of non-reply, the exception of the loss of the right of reply applies. The article puts forward the concrete construction of the system of the right of defense in our country in the aspect of relief ways of non-responding judgment. At the end of the article, the author puts forward four safeguard measures, which are to establish the principle of good faith in the civil procedure law of our country.
【学位授予单位】：宁波大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.1

【相似文献】