节点文献

民事诉讼先行调解制度研究

【作者】 杨静

【导师】 曲昇霞;

【作者基本信息】 扬州大学 , 法律, 2014, 硕士

【摘要】 在我国,“先行调解”一词最早在《最高人民法院关于适用简易程序审理民事案件的若干规定》中被明确提出过,后来逐渐发展成诉讼与非诉讼相衔接的纠纷解决机制,至2012年8月31日,“先行调解”作为一项制度在新《民事诉讼法》中被确定下来。从民事诉讼法立法条文来看,“诉”的存在是构成先行调解制度的前提;“当事人自愿”是先行调解的本质要求。新《民事诉讼法》只是对先行调解的轮廓做出了勾勒,对时间节点、调解范围以及调解主体等诸如此类的细节并未作出明确规定,学者们对其智者见智。在先行调解制度以法律条文的形式被确定之前,很多法院已经开展了先行调解工作,通过全面规范先行调解工作,严格先行调解案件流程管理,在一定程度上发挥了先行调解在解决纠纷中的作用:减轻了法院的压力,保持了法官的中立性和公正性,减轻了当事人的讼累。尽管先行调解制度化解了大量的涉诉矛盾纠纷,但暴露了诸多问题:调解主体错位,违背自愿原则,诉调难以实现无缝对接,调解协议效力确认瑕疵,制度管理失范等。我们需要从应然角度重新认识先行调解制度以准确运用该制度。先行调解制度有其存在的正当性基础。深厚的法律文化积淀、法院面临案多人少的尴尬局面、案件类型多样化是先行调解制度存在的现实基础;当事人合意、司法社会化原理、价值衡量原则是先行调解制度存在的法理基础。先行调解实质上是立案前的调解、自愿调解、替代性纠纷解决机制。先行调解制度不论是对当事人、法院还是整个社会都发挥着巨大作用:有利于当事人合意的形成,有利于双方和平共享调解成果,有利于降低纠纷解决成本;有利于缓解司法压力和提高司法效率,有利于转变法院的司法理念;有利于维护社会稳定和构建和谐社会。因此,我们需要对国外相关制度进行考察和借鉴,明晰先行调解的适用条件、探索适当的调解方式、实现诉调无缝对接、完善调解协议效力确认程序、健全先行调解的质效管理体系,从而合理适用该制度。

【Abstract】 In our country,"conciliate" first in the "Supreme People’s Court on the application of certain provisions of the summary trial in civil cases" was clearly stated, and later evolved into litigation and non-litigation dispute resolution mechanism of convergence, to2012August31,"first mediation" as a system to be finalized in the new "Civil Procedure Law". From the legislative provisions of Civil Procedure, the "v" is a prerequisite for the existence constitutes a first mediation system;"The parties voluntarily" is an essential requirement in advance of mediation. The new "Civil Law" just made a first outline the contours of mediation, the details of the time node, mediation and conciliation range of subjects and the like did not make it clear that the scholars of their wise see wisdom.Before the first mediation system in the form of legal provisions are identified, many courts have been carried out in advance mediation, mediation through a comprehensive specification first, first mediation cases strict process management, to a certain extent, played a leading mediation role in resolving disputes:reduce the pressure of the Court, the judge maintained neutrality and impartiality, reducing the defendant tired of the parties. Although the first mediation system to resolve a large number of Litigation disputes, but exposed many problems:mediation body dislocation, contrary to the principle of voluntariness, v. difficult to achieve seamless transfer, confirm the effectiveness of the mediation agreement blemishes, and other system management anomie.We need to re-understanding from the perspective ought to advance the mediation system to accurately use the system. First mediation system has a legitimate basis for its existence. Profound cultural heritage laws, court cases faced little more than embarrassment, case type diversity is a reality-based mediation system exists in advance; party consensus, of the principles of social justice, the principle is the legal basis to measure the value of leading mediation system exists. Mediation is essentially the first pre-filing mediation, voluntary mediation, alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. First mediation system both for the parties, the court or the entire community plays a huge role:party consensus in favor of the formation of the two sides is conducive to peace mediation to share the results, help to reduce the cost of dispute resolution; help alleviate the pressure on the judiciary and improve judicial efficiency, conducive to change the court’s judicial philosophy; conducive to maintaining social stability and building a harmonious society. Therefore, we need to inspect foreign-related system and draw clear in advance the applicable conditions of mediation, conciliation explore appropriate ways to achieve seamless v. tune and improve the effectiveness of the mediation agreement confirmation process, improve the quality and efficiency of mediation first management system, thus reasonable application of the system.

  • 【网络出版投稿人】 扬州大学
  • 【网络出版年期】2015年 02期
  • 【分类号】D925.14
  • 【被引频次】1
  • 【下载频次】433
节点文献中: 

本文链接的文献网络图示:

本文的引文网络