摘要
主体的权利与义务对等是公平原则的要求,我国的民事诉讼中却存在着第三人权责不对称的问题,其中参加效的缺失是其典型表现。生效裁判对非当事人的无独立请求权第三人产生何种效力,在立法上缺乏明确规定,在司法实践中法院或者适用既判力、或者适用事实预决效力。然而,参加诉讼的第三人与当事人、一般的案外人在诉讼地位与诉讼权利方面均不相同,使其与当事人或一般案外人承受相同的裁判效力具有不对称性。为此,我国亦有必要构建参加效制度,在借鉴域外参加效制度与理论的基础上,结合我国特殊的无独立请求权第三人制度,考察参加效与既判力、预决效力的差异,以确定我国参加效的特征与适用范围。
The principle of fairness demands equitable rights and duties for parties.In Chinese civil procedure,however,rights and duties of third parties are asymmetric,one typical demonstration of which is the absence of participating effect.There isn’t any rule on what effect judgments impose upon third parties who participate in the action without being adjudicated directly.In judicial practice,courts applied either res judicata,or pre-determined effect upon them.But third parties who participate in the action are not the same with parties or general non-parties in terms of status and rights in action.When it comes to effect of judgments,putting them in the same situation with parties or non-parties will be asymmetric and unjust.Therefore,it is also necessary for China to consider constructing the institute of participating effect.On the basis of learning foreign institutes and theories,and considering third parties in Chinese civil procedure,we can determine the features and scope of participating effect by distinguishing it from res judicata and pre-determined effect.
出处
《苏州大学学报（法学版）》
2019年第1期95-106,共12页
Journal of Soochow University：Law Edition
基金
2018年度国家法治与法学理论研究项目"解决执行难视角下财产保全制度研究"(项目编号:18SFB3020)
2018年国家社科基金青年项目"松散结合型法院治理模式研究"(项目编号:18CFX029)的阶段性成果
关键词
无独立请求权第三人
权责对称
参加效
既判力
预决效力
Third Parties without Independent Claims
Symmetric Rights and Duties
Participating Effect
Res Judicata
Pre-determined Effect
