虚假诉讼案外第三人权利救济制度研究

发布时间：2017-12-27 15:31

本文关键词：虚假诉讼案外第三人权利救济制度研究　出处：《安徽财经大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：伴随着我国社会法治水平的提高,公民在增强法律意识的同时,却带来了虚假诉讼的问题。虚假诉讼的出现和频发,不但有损他人合乎法律规定的权益,扰乱了诉讼秩序,更是对法律权威和尊严的无视,影响了社会的稳定与发展。当下民事诉讼中,经常出现行为人利用诉讼途径损害案外第三人正当权益的现象。但往往当案外第三人想要寻求法律救济其正当权益时,却找不到一种较为完善的法律程序对其进行救济。而保护案外第三人正当权益免受侵害,坚决抵制此类侵害行为的出现是《民事诉讼法》中诚实信用原则的体现,是实现司法公正的必然选择。那么,怎样在立法中完善对受损害的第三人正当权益的保护成为当下亟待处理的关键。本文中,笔者先分析了我国案外第三人权利救济制度的现状和缺陷,接着通过研究域外国家和地区相关立法的制度规定,借鉴他们的丰富经验,从程序保障的角度出发,提出将事前保障和事后保障结合起来,在立法上对虚假诉讼案外第三人权利救济制度加以完善。本文主要分为四个部分。第一部分为虚假诉讼及其对案外第三人权利的损害。通过借鉴并分析理论界学者的观点,归纳出笔者对虚假诉讼含义的见解,同时通过对一些具体司法数据的收集整理,观察实务中发生的一些虚假诉讼现象,分析研究我国近几年虚假诉讼的现状,并且从侵犯物权、债权、配偶一方合法权益、知识产权这四个领域中类型化出虚假诉讼对案外第三人权利损害的现状。第二部分为我国虚假诉讼案外第三人权利救济制度的现状及缺陷。首先,笔者阐述了我国现阶段对受虚假诉讼损害的案外第三人权利救济制度的立法规定,主要分为事前保护制度(法院的诉讼告知和案外人参与诉讼)和事后救济制度(第三人撤销之诉、执行异议之诉和案外人再审)这两种制度模式;其次,具体分析每一种制度存在的弊端及其适用上存在的不足,为文章第四部分笔者在现有救济方式的基础上提出完善的初步构想奠定基础。第三部分将域外国家和地区对虚假诉讼案外第三人权利救济制度的规定做出对比。英美法系主要是规定完善的事前保障比如第三人制度保护虚假诉讼受害人的合法权益;大陆法系国家（地区）是通过完善的事后保障如第三人撤销之诉和第三人申请再审这两种方式保护虚假诉讼受害人的合法权益。笔者希望通过对域外国家和地区相关规定的分析,并在此基础上加以借鉴,以便更好的探究我国对此方面的制度规定。第四部分为我国虚假诉讼案外第三人权利救济制度的完善。通过分析我国现有法律制度存在的不足,探究域外国家和地区的相关经验,最后总结出一些完善我国案外第三人权利救济制度的建议。如将法院诉讼告知的“可为”改为“应为”、将纯正的案外第三人纳入第三人参与的范围、扩大第三人撤销之诉的主客体范围、区分执行异议之诉的裁决机构与执行机构、拓展案外人申请再审的案件类型等等。
[Abstract]:With the improvement of the level of the rule of law in our society, citizens have brought about the problem of false litigation while enhancing their legal consciousness. The emergence and frequent occurrence of false litigation not only damages others' rights and interests, but also disturbs the order of litigation, ignores the authority and dignity of the law, and affects the stability and development of the society. In the current civil litigation, there is often a phenomenon that the actor uses the litigation way to damage the legitimate rights and interests of the third people outside the case. But when third people want to seek legal remedies for their legitimate rights and interests, they can not find a more perfect legal procedure to remedy them. The protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the third persons outside the protection case is not infringed. It is the embodiment of the principle of good faith in the civil procedural law and the inevitable choice to achieve judicial justice that we must resolutely resist such violations. Then, how to improve the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the damaged third people in the legislation has become the key to the immediate treatment. In this paper, the author first analyzes our country the third party rights status and defects of relief system, then through the study of foreign countries and regions relevant legislation and regulations, learn from their experience, starting from the angle of procedure guarantee, the guarantee in advance and post protection combined, the legislation on the false lawsuit the third human rights relief system should be perfected. This article is divided into four parts. The first part is the case of false litigation and the rights of the third party damage. By drawing on the theory and analysis of the views of scholars, the author sums up the meaning of false legal opinions, at the same time through the specific judicial data collected, some false litigation phenomenon observed in practice, the research on the present situation of our country in recent years of false litigation, and status from the four areas of infringement of property rights and creditor the spouse, the legitimate rights and interests of intellectual property rights in the case of third types of out false litigation rights damage. The second part is the status and defects of the third party's rights relief system outside the false lawsuit case in China. First of all, the author expounds the legislation of China at this stage of the false litigation damages by the third party rights relief system, mainly divided into pre protection system (court and inform the outsider to participate in the proceedings and relief system (third) lawsuit, execution objection litigation and outsider retrial) the two modes of system; secondly, analyze shortcomings of disadvantages of every kind of system and its application, which lays the foundation for the fourth part of the thesis, based on the existing remedies proposed on the preliminary conception of perfect. The third part makes a comparison between the foreign countries and regions on the provisions of the third party's rights relief system outside the false lawsuit. Common law is the main provisions in advance such as the third system to protect the legitimate rights and interests of victims of fraud litigation support; civil law countries (regions) is to improve after the security such as the withdraw of the third person and the third person to apply for protection of victims of Fraud Litigation Retrial of the two kinds of legal rights. The author hopes to make an analysis of relevant provisions of the extraterritorial countries and regions and draw lessons from them so as to better explore the institutional provisions of this aspect in China. The fourth part is the improvement of the third party's rights relief system outside the false lawsuit case in China. By analyzing the shortcomings of the existing legal system in China, we explore the relevant experience of overseas countries and regions, and finally conclude some suggestions for improving our third party's right relief system. If the court told the "could be" to "should be", the pure case third people into third people involved in the scope, expand the withdraw of the third person of the subject and object scope, distinguish the implementation of objection decision mechanism and execution mechanism, expand the outsider retrial case type etc..
【学位授予单位】：安徽财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D925.3

【参考文献】