民事突袭性裁判防止论.pdfVIP

目 录 引 言··································································································1 一、民事突袭性裁判概述·············································································2 （一）民事突袭性裁判的内涵界定···························································2 （二）民事突袭性裁判的类型分析···························································4 二、民事突袭性裁判防止的理论归属与现实意义···············································5 （一）程序主体权、法定听审请求权—— 民事突袭性裁判防止的理论归属········5 （二）民事突袭性裁判防止的现实意义·····················································8 三、德国及我国台湾地区防止民事突袭性裁判之经验借鉴··································11 （一）德国防止民事突袭性裁判之相关立法及实务介绍·······························11 （二）我国台湾地区防止民事突袭性裁判之相关理论及立法例介绍················13 四、民事突袭性裁判防止的必然路径·····························································15 （一）争点整理—— 民事突袭性裁判防止的预防之策··································15 （二）阐明权行使—— 民事突袭性裁判防止的黄金之盾·······························2 1 （三）心证公开—— 民事突袭性裁判防止的终结之举··································27 结 语·································································································33 致 谢·································································································34 参考文献·································································································35 1 民事突袭性裁判防止论 引 言 民事诉讼价值取向之公正与效率之争，由来已久。舍效率以保公正或舍公正以求效 率，都未免失之偏颇。司法公正是人类司法过程中亘古不变的目标和指导理念，效率却 是人类文明进步、社会发展的追求和催化剂。实现两者的平衡是二十一世纪我们司法改 革的指导理论之一。现代宪法赋予每一个公民请求进行公正裁判的权利，公民以自身合 法权益受到非法侵害为由，诉诸法院，请求法院予以公正解决。裁判主体进行裁判必须 在维护司法公正的同时最大限度地追求司法效率，否则对纷争个体而言“迟来的正义为 非正义” 。对其它非涉案普通民众而言，司法资源作为一种公共福利资源，每个公民都 有平等加以利用的权利。如果某一纷争个体过多的耗费这种福利资源，则将直接导致社 会整体公正的缺失。正如奥地利民事诉讼法之父Franz Klein 所认为：诉讼之进行，已不 能只考虑到个人的权利保护，还应该考虑到社会全体的利益。诉讼不只是当事人个人在 法院进行争讼的“私事”而已，它是国家为此而提供一个“ 国家福利机构”，以供其使用的 1 社会集团现象