听审请求权研究
发布时间：2019-04-30 07:49
【摘要】：听审请求权这一程序基本权是宪法性权利的重要内容,尊重当事人的听审请求权是一国宪法的基本要求。近年来，我国司法公信力不高，其重要原因之一就在于当事人的听审请求权保障不够充分，因此,在我国的法治化进程中,加强民事诉讼中当事人的听审请求权保障,显得尤为重要。 听审请求权是指民事诉讼中的法院在对当事人权利、义务和责任进行裁判的时候，就案件事实、证据材料、适用法律等问题，有要求给予其充分发表自己的意见、主张的机会，使其能富有影响地参与法院解决争议活动的权利。听审请求权是当事人享有的一项程序基本权，彰显了当事人的程序主体地位。它包含受通知权、到场权、陈述权（包含辩论权）、证明权、突袭性裁判禁止请求权、意见受尊重权等方面的权利，体现了尊重人的尊严、法治国家、司法公正理念。英国、美国、德国以及我国台湾地区的关于听审请求权作了较为详细的介绍，听审请求权被视为文明社会的普遍法则，但我国尚未充分重视，应尽快将其实定化并健全相关制度予以保障。 我国《宪法》没有明确规定听审请求权，我国民事诉讼立法的一些制度虽涉及听审请求权的部分内容，但是规定不全面且不系统。具体制度的设计亦是不完善，如“送达难”、证据交换制度，举证时限制度规定不合理，法官释明、心证公开义务规定不全面等等方面的问题。根据我国目前的司法状况，我们应当对听审请求权予以明确的规定，并对听审请求权进行完善的制度保障。事前保障在于改进我国现行送达制度、完善证据失权制度、强化法官的释明义务，进一步公开法官心证等相关制度；事后保障在于完善我国听审请求权的民事救济程序，，如将侵犯听审请求权任何之一内容列为提起再审之事由，同时借鉴德国的规定，提出构建听审异议制度保障当事人的听审请求权。
[Abstract]:The basic procedural right of hearing claim is an important part of constitutional right. It is the basic requirement of a country's constitution to respect the litigant's right of hearing claim. In recent years, the judicial credibility of our country is not high, one of its important reasons lies in the insufficient protection of the litigants' right to hear the request for hearing. Therefore, in the process of ruling by law in our country, we should strengthen the protection of the litigants' right to hear the application for hearing in civil litigation. It is particularly important. The right to hear an application refers to the opportunity for the court in a civil action to give full expression of its own opinions and opinions when adjudicating the rights, obligations and responsibilities of the parties concerned, in respect of the facts of the case, the evidentiary materials, and the application of the law, and so on. The right to participate in the Court's dispute settlement activities in an influential manner. The right to hear a claim is a basic procedural right enjoyed by the parties, which shows the party's status as the subject of the procedure. It includes the right of notice, the right of arrival, the right of statement (including the right of argument), the right of proof, the right of prohibition of adversarial judgment, the right of respect for opinions, etc., which embodies the concept of respect for human dignity, the country ruled by law, and the concept of judicial justice. Britain, the United States, Germany and Taiwan have made a more detailed introduction to the right to hear claims. The right to hear claims has been regarded as a universal law of civilized society, but China has not paid enough attention to it. The fact should be defined and improved as soon as possible to protect the relevant system. The Constitution of our country does not specify the right of hearing request clearly. Some systems of our country's civil procedure legislation involve some contents of the right of hearing request, but the stipulation is not comprehensive and systematic. The design of the concrete system is also imperfect, such as "difficult to serve", evidence exchange system, unreasonable system of the time limit of proof, judge's explanation, incomplete stipulation of the obligation of disclosure of evidence, and so on. According to the current judicial situation of our country, we should make clear provisions on the right of hearing request and perfect the system guarantee of the right of hearing request. The guarantee in advance lies in the improvement of the present system of service of our country, the perfection of the system of loss of power of evidence, the strengthening of the judge's obligation of interpretation, and the further disclosure of the relevant system such as the judge's The safeguard after the event lies in perfecting the civil remedy procedure of the right of hearing request in our country, for example, if any content of violating the right of hearing request is listed as the cause of initiating the retrial, and at the same time drawing lessons from the provisions of Germany, Put forward to construct the hearing objection system to guarantee the parties' right to hear the request for hearing.
【学位授予单位】：河北大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.1
本文编号：2468611
[Abstract]:The basic procedural right of hearing claim is an important part of constitutional right. It is the basic requirement of a country's constitution to respect the litigant's right of hearing claim. In recent years, the judicial credibility of our country is not high, one of its important reasons lies in the insufficient protection of the litigants' right to hear the request for hearing. Therefore, in the process of ruling by law in our country, we should strengthen the protection of the litigants' right to hear the application for hearing in civil litigation. It is particularly important. The right to hear an application refers to the opportunity for the court in a civil action to give full expression of its own opinions and opinions when adjudicating the rights, obligations and responsibilities of the parties concerned, in respect of the facts of the case, the evidentiary materials, and the application of the law, and so on. The right to participate in the Court's dispute settlement activities in an influential manner. The right to hear a claim is a basic procedural right enjoyed by the parties, which shows the party's status as the subject of the procedure. It includes the right of notice, the right of arrival, the right of statement (including the right of argument), the right of proof, the right of prohibition of adversarial judgment, the right of respect for opinions, etc., which embodies the concept of respect for human dignity, the country ruled by law, and the concept of judicial justice. Britain, the United States, Germany and Taiwan have made a more detailed introduction to the right to hear claims. The right to hear claims has been regarded as a universal law of civilized society, but China has not paid enough attention to it. The fact should be defined and improved as soon as possible to protect the relevant system. The Constitution of our country does not specify the right of hearing request clearly. Some systems of our country's civil procedure legislation involve some contents of the right of hearing request, but the stipulation is not comprehensive and systematic. The design of the concrete system is also imperfect, such as "difficult to serve", evidence exchange system, unreasonable system of the time limit of proof, judge's explanation, incomplete stipulation of the obligation of disclosure of evidence, and so on. According to the current judicial situation of our country, we should make clear provisions on the right of hearing request and perfect the system guarantee of the right of hearing request. The guarantee in advance lies in the improvement of the present system of service of our country, the perfection of the system of loss of power of evidence, the strengthening of the judge's obligation of interpretation, and the further disclosure of the relevant system such as the judge's The safeguard after the event lies in perfecting the civil remedy procedure of the right of hearing request in our country, for example, if any content of violating the right of hearing request is listed as the cause of initiating the retrial, and at the same time drawing lessons from the provisions of Germany, Put forward to construct the hearing objection system to guarantee the parties' right to hear the request for hearing.
【学位授予单位】：河北大学
【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8条
1 刘敏;;论民事诉讼当事人听审请求权[J];法律科学(西北政法大学学报);2008年06期
2 任凡;;论美国法院对听审请求权的保障——从联邦最高法院判例谈起[J];法律科学(西北政法大学学报);2010年06期
3 周成泓;司法主体性理念探析——以民事司法制度为中心[J];甘肃社会科学;2005年03期
4 张卫平;论民事诉讼中失权的正义性[J];法学研究;1999年06期
5 常怡,黄娟;现代诉讼的法理性透视[J];现代法学;2001年01期
6 田平安;肖晖;;简论人权的民事诉讼保护[J];现代法学;2007年05期
7 江伟,吴泽勇;论现代民事诉讼立法的基本理念[J];中国法学;2003年03期
8 李浩;;举证时限制度的困境与出路——追问证据失权的正义性[J];中国法学;2005年03期
相关博士学位论文 前1条
1 蓝冰;德国民事法定听审请求权研究[D];西南政法大学;2008年
本文编号：2468611
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/susongfa/2468611.html
