摘要
给付之诉在《民法典》和民事诉讼中地位突出。给付请求和判决主文可能针对金钱给付,也可能针对特定的作为与不作为行为。给付之诉的审理牵涉请求权和诉讼标的的识别问题,给付内容明确的给付判决通常可以成为执行依据。给付判决在要求债务人给付之外,也包含了对相应给付请求权的确认,但这种确认与对法律关系本身效力的确认不同。停止侵害之诉、产生临时性救济效果的行为保全制度,以及具有类似给付内容、代表我国特色的人格权禁令,都指向对义务人未来行为的禁止,也应当从给付之诉的角度特别关注。根据给付内容是否明确,继续履行判项可能分别构成给付判决和确认合同有效的判决。确认之诉与给付之诉有时不易区分,关键在于“给付”与“确认”指向的救济或权利保护形式。探望权诉讼和确认优先受偿权诉讼均在确认之外具有明确的给付要求,应属于给付之诉。虽然确认判决原则上不应具有执行力,但是考虑我国实践需求,可以尝试从判项中解释出给付之诉必备的给付要求。
The claim for performance plays a crucial role both in Civil Code and in civil procedure.This claim and the corresponding judgment target not only some monetary payments but also mandatory actions or injunctions.Adjudication on the claim for performance relates to the identification of the rights of claim(Anspruch)and the subject matter of the claim.A judgment for specific performance could normally act as the ground to initiate the enforcement procedure.Besides payment from the debtor to the creditor,the confirmation of the entitlement of a claimant is also included in the judgment for performance.However,this confirmation differs from the confirmation of the validity of the legal relationship between parties itself.The permanent injunction,some interim measures like behavior preservation orders,and the similar injunction in cases of personal rights,which is deemed to have unique Chinese characteristics,all aim to prohibit the debtor to behave in certain ways in the future.Therefore,these sorts of cases are supposed to be understood in the framework of the claim for performance.Depending on the specificity of the content of the judgment,there could be either a judgment for performance stipulated in a contract or a declaratory judgment on the validity of a contract,when the judge makes a judgment which demands the debtor continue to perform a contract.It is sometimes difficult to distinguish the claim for performance from a declaratory claim,whereas the relief sought,in other words the forms of protection,shows the key to set them apart.For instance,the visiting right of a parent to a child and the confirmation of some substantive priority right are supposed to be classified as the claim for performance due to their clear contents of performance.In contrast to the judgment for performance,a declaratory judgment is normally not able to initiate any process of judicial enforcement.Due to the strong needs in judicial practice,nevertheless,the intention of performance could sometimes be interpreted out of the operati
出处
《南大法学》
CSSCI
2021年第5期125-141,共17页
NanJing University Law Journal
基金
2018年国家社会科学基金青年项目“我国民事诉讼标的识别的诉讼法进路研究”的阶段性成果
中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助。
关键词
给付之诉
请求权
行为给付
继续履行
确认判决执行力
Claim for Performance
Right of Claim Action(Anspruch)
Performance of Mandatory Actions or Injunctions
Continued Performance of a Contract
Enforceability of the Declaratory Judgment
