中间判决制度研究

【作者】 宋平；

【导师】 李祖军；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 诉讼法学， 2006， 硕士

【摘要】 在大陆法系民事诉讼中，当法官审理一些争点较多、案情比较复杂的民事案件时，为了提高诉讼效率，使庭审秩序更加有序化，法官会运用职权指挥当事人集中就某一争点进行攻击和防御。法官对该争点达于心证时，就可以作出中间判决确认该争点。学界通说认为，中间判决的对象为独立的攻击防御方法、中间争点以及请求原因；中间判决有别于与终局判决，中间判决没有既判力，当事人对中间判决不服只能在该审级结束时将中间判决与终局判决一同提起上诉。中间判决制度是大陆法系民事诉讼中一项重要的诉讼制度，中间判决制度起源于德国，发展于日本和我国台湾地区。 本文从比较法角度对中间判决制度进行分析研究，主要介绍了德国、日本和我国台湾地区的中间判决制度，并结合我国具体国情以及司法实践的现状提出了建构我国中间判决制度的设想。 本文共三万余字，分为四个部分。 第一部分对中间判决在民事判决中的定位及概念进行分析。这部分首先以分析民事判决的分类出发，导出中间判决与其它类型民事判决的不同。中间判决是法官对案件的先决性事项进行的裁决，是为终局判决作准备，是民事判决的一种特殊的分类。法官在庭审进行中依职权自由裁量是否采用中间判决。所以中间判决的性质为确认性、管理性与准备性。我国民事诉讼法学界时常将大陆法系中间判决与中间确认判决相混淆。中间判决和中间确认判决虽然都是在诉讼程序进行中法官对某些争点所作出的，但是二者在性质和效力方面完全不同，中间判决和中间确认判决是两种不同的判决制度。 文章的第二部分对中间判决制度的历史和现状进行了比较分析。中间判决制度起源于大陆法系德国。与诉讼进行采取当事人主义的1806年法国民事诉讼法典不同，1877年德国制定的第一部民事诉讼法典对程序的进行采取了法官职权主义。为了提高诉讼效率、防止当事人拖延诉讼，法官对程序具有较强的指挥权。1877德国民事诉讼法典将中间判决与释明权、集更多还原

【Abstract】 In the civil action in countries of the continental law system, when adjudicating a complicated civil case with many issues, in order to promote the litigation efficiency, and keep the order of the interrogation in court, the judge may exercise his power of office to command the two parties to launch attacks and make defenses for a issue. Having an evaluation of evidence about the issue through inner conviction, the judge can make an interim judgment to assure the existence of the issue. Generally speaking, the objects of the interim judgment are independent methods of attacks and defences, the interim issue, and the reason for claim. The interim judgment is different for the final judgment, for the former has no fixed validity of judgment. If the litigant does not give in to the interim judgment, it can only make an appeal at the end of the trial, about the interim judgment together with the appeal about the final judgment. The interim judgment system is an important litigation system for countries of the continental law system. It originated from Germany. Japan and Taiwan respectively made some adjustments according to their own national or regional situation.Analyses of the interim judgment are made in this easy through the comparison of laws. The interim systems in the civil laws of Germany, Japan, and Taiwan are introduces, and the idea of constructing an interim system in our country is put forward. The essay is composed of four parts.The first part of the essay analyzes the concept the interim judgment and its position in the civil judgment. In this part, the difference between the interim judgment and other civil judgments is brought about through the analysis of classification of civil judgments. Being a special kind of civil judgments, the interim judgment is a verdict on the matters which should be dealt at first. It is a preparation for the final judgment. In the interrogation in court, the judge exercises his authority to determine whether to make an interim judgment. So, making affirmance, doing preparation, doing managements are the functions of the interim judgment. The civil law circle of our country often confuses the interim judgment with the interim confirming judgment. Although both are made by the judge on some issues in the proceeding, they have completely different characters and更多还原