摘要
分公司是否具有单独的当事人能力,是一个有争议的问题。不论是《德国民事诉讼法》仅仅认可分公司的消极当事人能力,还是《日本民事诉讼法》同时认可其积极当事人能力,均是基于便利当事人诉讼的实践理性考量的结果。认可分公司单独的当事人能力,再辅之以执行程序中基于既判力主观范围间接扩张的被执行主体变更与追加制度,是一种逻辑自洽、体系化的路径。否定分公司单独的当事人能力的观点,不仅误读了分公司不能独立承担民事责任的实体法规定,也忽视了民事诉讼法为何需要赋予分公司当事人能力的理论思考前提。劳动争议案件有其特殊性,如否定分公司单独的当事人能力,不仅完全违反"程序当事人"的法理和立法规定,而且与司法解释及司法实践中所肯定个体工商户和保险公司分支机构可以为单独的诉讼当事人的现实相矛盾。
There have been controversies over whether branch companies have in dependent capacity of litigation. Both the German Code of Civil Procedure,which approbates the passive capacity of litigation of branch companies,and the Civil Procedural Law of Japan,which approbates the positive capacity of litigation of branch companies,are the results of rational considerations of facilitating the litigants. It＇s a systematic path with self-consistent logic to approbate branch company＇s independent capacity of litigation with auxiliary system of subject change and addition in enforcement procedure which is based on indirect expansion of the subjective scope of res judicata. Denying branch company＇s independent capacity of litigation is not only a misinterpretation of the provisions of substantive law that branch company cannot bear independent civil liability but also ignores the theoretical reasons why the civil procedure law gives branch company the capacity of litigation. Although labor dispute cases have particularity of their own,denying the branch company＇s independent capacity of litigation in dealing with such cases is totally against the legal theory and legislative requirements about＂parties to the proceedings＂,and contradict the judicial interpretation and judicial practice,which accept individual businesses and branch insurance companies as individual litigants.
出处
《西南石油大学学报（社会科学版）》
2015年第2期60-65,共6页
Journal of Southwest Petroleum University(Social Sciences Edition)
关键词
分公司
程序当事人
当事人能力
权利能力
劳动争议
branch company
parties to the proceedings
capacity of litigation
capacity of civil rights
labor dispute
