民事诉讼自认制度探析

【作者】 陈幸欢；

【导师】 田平安；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 诉讼法， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 自认制度是一项古老而重要的制度,无论是在大陆法系还是在英美法系国家中都有关于自认制度的规定,辩论主义是自认制度的理论基础及效力根据,《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》关于自认的规定突破性地确立了我国自认制度的框架,但还不够系统和完善。我国民事诉讼立法应当确立约束性辩论原则,明确自认概念,法院应加强对自认撤销的限制。本文共四个部分。本文第一部分概述了各国及有关地区关于自认制度的立法例以及我国关于自认制度的立法状况,文中指出自认制度是一项古老而重要的制度,无论是在大陆法系还是在英美法系国家中都有关于自认制度的规定,概述了德国、日本、美国、法国、巴西、伯利兹、加拿大、爱沙尼亚、我国台湾地区关于自认制度的立法状况。指出我国民事诉讼法及相关司法解释对体现当事人意思自治的自认的规定经历了一个从无到有、从个别条文到相对系统的过程,于2002年4月1日起施行的《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》关于自认的规定突破性地确立了我国自认制度的框架,但还不够系统和完善。此外,对关于自认制度的学术研究状况进行了概述,指出在日本和我国台湾地区等国家和地区,学术界对于自认制度有较为深入和系统的研究,当前我国大陆地区法学界关于自认制度的研究还处于起步阶段,对于自认制度的研究还主要处于对于自认的基本理论进行探讨的阶段。本文第二部分阐述了自认制度的基本理论。主要论述了自认制度的理论基础及效力根据为辩论主义,并阐述了自认与认诺、自认与自白、自认与承认、自认与让步、民事诉讼中的自认与行政诉讼中的自认等相关概念的区别,自认是指对于己不利的事实的承认,而认诺则是对对方当事人的诉讼请求的承认,二者在承认的对象、作出的主体和导致的结果等方面存在本质的区别,自认与自白是一个概念的两种不同说法,自认的概念通常用于民事诉讼中,而自白用于刑事诉讼中,让步是当事人在民事诉讼中为了达成和解或者调解而作出的退让和妥协,因此而涉及到的对于有关案件事实的妥协说法不同于自认。论述了诉讼上的自认与诉讼外的自认、明示自认与默示自认、完全自认与附限制的自认、自发性自认和非自发性自认等自认的类型,诉讼上的自认是指当事人在法律所规定的一定程序中所作的自认,而诉讼外的自认则是当事人在法律所规定的程序外所作的自认,二者的区别在于自认的作出是否在法律规定的程序内,明示自认与默示自认是以当事人自认作出的方式的不同而作出的分类,完全自认与限制自认是依据自认是否附加了限制所作的分类,完全自认是当事人对于于己不利的事实全部不加限制地明确表示承认,而附限制的自认则是当事人对于于己不利的事实部分或者附加限制条件地表示承认,自发性自认和非自发性自认的区别首先在于对自认人不利的事实由谁先行表述,其次在于自认产生拘束力的时间不同。通说认为构成诉讼上的自认需要具备四个条件,文中指出将“于已不利”列入自认的成立要件是不恰当的,结合孙英杰案件,笔者认为对于虚假自认可以根据是否违反法律的强制性规定和侵犯社会公共利益和第三人合法权益分两种情况来处理,自认一旦成立,不但对作出自认的当事人发生拘束力,也对法院发生拘束力,但涉及身份关系案件中的自认、非本诉中的自认、涉及国家利益、社会公共利益和他人合法权益事实的自认、未经特别授权的委托代理人导致承认对方诉讼请求的自认、已撤回或者撤销的自认、共同诉讼中的自认、诉讼外的自认、对处分不能的事实之自认等自认的效力受到限制,自认的不可随意撤销性是自认的基本属性之一,但各国法律通常都规定在特定情形下可以撤回或者撤销自认的效力,综观各国关于自认的立法例,对于自认作出方式的规定大体有三种,第一种为书面方式,第二种为口头方式,第三种为书面和口头方式皆可,《巴西民事诉讼法典》对于诉讼上自认和诉讼外自认的有效作出方式有不同的规定,我国并未明确规定自认的方式应当以书面还是口头方式作出,应当理解为口头和书面两种方式皆可。自认的不可分性和不可撤消性并列为自认的两大基本属性,众多国家均明文规定了自认的不可分性,正确理解自认的不可分性对于司法实践有着重要的意义,对于当事人所作出的自认,应当视为一个整体,另一方当事人不能分割开来单独援用于自己有利的部分,而舍弃于自己不利的部分。本文第三部分为我国自认制度的不足,我国自认制度的缺陷首先是运行环境的缺失,其次,我国关于自认制度的法律规定不够系统和完善,我国法律规定没有确认自认概念,对于当事人为不知道、不记得之陈述是否成立自认以及第三人、共同诉讼人自认的相关情形没有作出规定,此外,法院对于自认撤销的限制不够严格,对于自认的不可分性和自认在非本诉中的效力没有作出规定。本文第四部分为我国自认制度的完善。认为我国民事诉讼立法应当加强当事入主义诉讼模式色彩,确立约束性辩论原则,完善相关配套制度,确立自认概念,改“当事人的承认”为“自认”,当事人对他方主张的事实,为不知道、不记得之陈述,应否视为自认,由人民法院审查决定,无独立请求权的第三人对案件的实体内容无权施加直接影响,依照自认理论,应当认为无独立请求权的第三人无权为自认,法院应加强对自认撤销的限制,规定自认的不可分性和自认仅在本诉中有效。更多还原

【Abstract】 Admission institution is an old and important institution. There are regulations of Admission institution both in continental law system and in Anglo-American law system. The Adversary System is the theory and validity basis of admission institution.《Some Regulations of Civil Procedural Evidence by the Highest Court》has set up a frame of the admission institution about the regulations, but it is not systematic and perfect enough. The civil procedure law legislation should set up a bounding and adversary principle, clarify the concept of admission, and the court should strengthen the restrict of admission cancellation.This paper consists of four parts.In the first part,the writer outlines the legislative system of admission institution in some countries and regions,the paper concludes admission institution is an old and important institution.There are regulations of admission institution both in continental law system and in Anglo-American law system. Outlines the legislation of admission institution in Germany, Japan, the United States, France, Brazil, Belize, Canada, Estonia, Taiwan province of china.Pointed out that the rules of admission institution in China’s Civil Procedural Law and the relevant judicial interpretations experienced a process of Individual to System,《Some Regulations of Civil Procedural Evidence by the Highest Court》has set up a frame of the admission institution about the regulations, but it is not systematic and perfect enough.In addition, the writer outlines the status of academic research system of admission institution,pointing out that in Japan and Taiwan province of china has a more thorough and systematic academic research about admission institution , the research about admission institution in the mainland of china is still in the initial stage, the research object is the basic theory of admission institution.In the second part,the writer outlines the basic theory of admission institution. Pointed out that The Adversary System is the theory and validity basis of admission institution. There are difference between admission and confession, the admission of civil procedure law and admission of administrative procedure law , admission is the recognition to the facts which are disadvantageous to oneself, confession is the recognition to the litigious claim of opposite party,there are great different in target, main body and result between admission and confession,there are difference admission types such as admission in lawsuit and admission out lawsuit, ostension admission and tacit admission, fully admission and limit admission, spontaneity admission and not spontaneity admission,the admission in lawsuit is the admission that parties make in some particular program, admission out lawsuit is the admission that parties make not in some particular program, ostension admission and tacit admission are classified by the different ways of admission, fully admission and limit admission are classified whether the admission is restrictions ,the difference between fully admission and limit admission is who claim the disadvantage fact firstly and produced constrain force in different times. the common theory holds that admission consists of four conditions,the paper pointed out that it is impertinent to put the disadvantage fact to oneself into the condition of admission,combining with the case of ying jie sun, this paper argues that different decision could be maken by whether the false admission is a violation of the mandatory provision of law and violations of social and public interests and interests of a third person,admission once established, not only to binding the parties, but also binding on the courts ,but some admission do not goes into effect such as the admission involved in identity relationship,the admission not in this case,the admission involved in social and public interests and interests of a third person, the admission that lead to the recognition of opposite party ’s litigious claim by authorized agent without special authorization, the admission that has been revocation , the admission in joint litigation, the admission out of lawsuit, the admission about the fact that can ’ t disposition,the revocation property is the basic nature of admission, but are usually provisions of many countries ’ law that can revoke the effectiveness of admission in specific circumstances, Looking at many of the legislation about admission, the way of making admission roughly three types ,the first type is in writing, the second type is the oral form, the third type are written and oral form,《Brazil Code of Civil Procedure》has different regulations to the admission in lawsuit and admission out lawsuit, Chinese law has not clearly defined in a manner that should made in writing or orally, it should be understood that both orally and in writing are allowed, the nature of indivisibility and irrevocable are the two basic attributes of admission, many countries are expressly provided for admission, understanding indivisibility nature of admission correctly is of important significance to judicial practice,the admission should be considered as a whole, the other party could not separated it and cited the part of beneficial to themselves, and give up the part of disadvantage to themselves.The third part is the admission’ deficiency of our country, first, the runtime environment is missing, second, the legal provisions of admission is not enough for the system and perfect. the concept of admission did not established,there are no regulation about The parties make the statement of do not know and do not remember as well as the admission made by the third person and colitigants, the restrict of admission cancellation inadequate strict,there are no regulations about the indivisibility and the effectiveness not in this litigation of the admission.The fourth part is the perfection of admission. The civil procedure law legislation should set up a bounding and adversary principle, clarify the concept of admission, and the court should strengthen the restrict of admission cancellation. When the parties make the statement of do not know and do not remember,courts should examining and judging to make decision. the third party without independent right of claim have no right to impose direct affect to the body content of case, according to admission theory, the third party without independent right of claim have no right to make admission, and the court should strengthen the restrict of admission cancellation, define the indivisibility and the effectiveness not in this litigation of the admission.更多还原