【摘要】 为缓解"案多人少"矛盾,很有必要以妥当处理请求权竞合纠纷为切入点,拓展诉的客观合并制度的研究。与我国《民法典》第186条规范目的相符合的是请求权自由竞合说与择一实现说。依据实体法的规定、学说及我国诉讼标的理论、诉讼制度,诉讼实务中可能出现规模化的后续诉讼。诉的客观合并具有现实必要性和理论上的应然性。随着请求权竞合现象增多,为了充分保障当事人权利、一次性解决纠纷,应尽快确立完整的诉的客观合并制度。就诉的客观合并的具体形态而言,不宜以客观预备合并应对请求权观念竞合现象。请求权观念竞合时采竞合合并较为适宜。请求权现实竞合时可允许选择合并与客观预备合并。更多还原

【Abstract】 In order to alleviate the contradiction of heavy caseload and under-staff situation, it is necessary to expand the research on the objective joinder system of litigation from the perspective of properly handling the concurrence disputes of claims. The theory of free concurrence of claims and the theory of alternative realization are consistent with the normative purpose of Article 186 of China’s Civil Code. According to the provisions and theories of substantive law and the theory and system of litigation object in China, there may be large-scale follow-up litigation in litigation practice. The objective joinder of litigation has practical necessity and theoretical necessity. With the increase of concurrence of claims, in order to fully protect the rights of the parties and solve disputes at one time, a complete objective joinder system of claims should be established as soon as possible. As far as the specific form of objective joinder of litigation is concerned, it is not suitable to deal with the phenomenon of concurrence of claims with objective preparatory joinder. When the concept of claim coincides, it is more appropriate to adopt the alternative joinder. As far as the real concurrence of claims is concerned, the parties can be allowed to choose the selective joinder or the objective preparatory joinder.更多还原