论发回重审——以中部地区某中级法院为考察对象-硕士论文.pdfVIP

摘 要 发回重审作为一项重要的诉讼制度，是上级法院行使审判监督权最直接、最 具体的表现，其目的在于保障裁判的公正性。但近年来，理论界和实务界对这一 制度的质疑颇多。从司法实践来看，发回重审制度存在着诸多缺陷，立法的滞后 性使得该制度不能适应形势的发展。发回重审的具体标准规定得比较模糊，缺乏 客观性，也导致了发回重审在实际操作中的不稳定性和随意性。发回重审违背了 公正与效率的要求，它使得诉讼返回到起始状态，作程序性重复，造成一些案件 久拖不决。发回重审所体现的救济性是消极的，它所要实施的司法救济需迂回到 一审法院来进行，二审法院的审判职能在此时被闲置。发回重审的不可诉性也导 致了无监督性。我国现行法律没有规定任何机制来评价发回重审本身的正确与 否。这样就导致发回重审具体适用中的无监督性，容易造成司法腐败。 本文通过实证调研，深入分析了该项制度在审判实践中的运行状况，发掘出 其中存在的问题，并提出个人粗拙建议，以期对完善民事诉讼程序、促进司法公 正和效率有所裨益。 关键词：发回重审 审判实践 公正 效率 I ABSTRACT As an important litigation institution，sending back retries a case is the directest and concretest embody of the higher court exercising the power of judge surpervision. Its aim is to pretect the judges justice. But in late years,theory and practice circles raise a query for this institution. Looking from the judicial practice,the institution has many defect. The lesgislative backward causes the institution cant adapt the situational development. Specific standards for a relatively vague, lack of objectivity, and resulted in remandment during the actual operation of instability and randomness. Sending back retries a case disobey the demand of justice and efficiency. It causes the litigation comes back to the initiative state. The procedure repeatition causes many cases cant have a conclusion for many years. The quality of remedy which sending back retries a case embody is passive. It should come back to the lower court,and the judge function of the higher court is unoccupied. Sending back retries a case cant be recoursed to law,so it is not supervisory. The current law has not regulated any mechanism to evaluate