本文選題：南京國(guó)民政府 + 民事執(zhí)行制度�。� 參考：《江西師范大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行法，是規(guī)定以公力實(shí)現(xiàn)執(zhí)行名義效力的程序法。我國(guó)歷史上并無獨(dú)立的民事訴訟法規(guī)，更無單獨(dú)的強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行法。直到清末修訂法律時(shí)期，受到西方法律的影響，才制定出我國(guó)首部獨(dú)立的《強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行律草案》，可惜未經(jīng)審定，清廷即告覆滅。1912年中華民國(guó)成立后，因《強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行律草案》未經(jīng)晚清政府審定，不在援用之列，各地審判廳為辦理民事執(zhí)行事務(wù)，紛紛出臺(tái)各種民事執(zhí)行辦法，形式既不統(tǒng)一，且內(nèi)容混亂。鑒于此，北京政府于1920年制訂了《民事訴訟執(zhí)行規(guī)則》并頒布施行，成為我國(guó)歷史上首部正式頒布實(shí)施的民事執(zhí)行法規(guī)。無論是晚清政府的立法嘗試，還是北京政府的立法探索，為后來南京國(guó)民政府時(shí)期的強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行立法提供了借鑒。 1927年，南京政府成立之初，核準(zhǔn)援用前北京政府的法律，《民事訴訟執(zhí)行規(guī)則》成為辦理民事執(zhí)行事件的法規(guī)，在《強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行法》制定之前，發(fā)揮了重要的功效。辦理民事執(zhí)行事件過程中，不但總結(jié)和積累了經(jīng)驗(yàn)，同時(shí)進(jìn)一步暴露了《民事訴訟執(zhí)行規(guī)則》的缺陷。為此，南京國(guó)民政府司法部出臺(tái)《補(bǔ)訂民事執(zhí)行辦法》，對(duì)《民事訴訟執(zhí)行規(guī)則》進(jìn)行補(bǔ)充。正是經(jīng)過長(zhǎng)期的執(zhí)行實(shí)踐，為《強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行法》的制定奠定了實(shí)踐基礎(chǔ)。 《強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行法》是在近代中國(guó)新舊文化交替、中西文化碰撞的時(shí)代背景下產(chǎn)生的，具有鮮明的時(shí)代烙印。這部執(zhí)行法的制定，不但參酌當(dāng)時(shí)從清末到民國(guó)既有的民事執(zhí)行法律法規(guī)，同時(shí)借鑒和吸收當(dāng)時(shí)其他國(guó)家和地區(qū)的民事訴訟法規(guī)及強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行法規(guī)，因此既具時(shí)代特色，又不失本國(guó)傳統(tǒng)，，使現(xiàn)代民事執(zhí)行理念得到發(fā)展與完善,現(xiàn)代民事執(zhí)行法律制度得以確立。這是當(dāng)時(shí)一批立法精英努力的結(jié)果，他們留學(xué)歸來，帶來了先進(jìn)的法律理論、法制理念和立法技術(shù)，推動(dòng)了《強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行法》的現(xiàn)代化。 《強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行法》框架完整，結(jié)構(gòu)嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)，但沒有將對(duì)金錢債權(quán)的執(zhí)行作為一個(gè)獨(dú)立章節(jié)，而是分化為第二章的“對(duì)于動(dòng)產(chǎn)之執(zhí)行”、第三章的“對(duì)于不動(dòng)產(chǎn)之執(zhí)行”、第四章的“對(duì)于其他財(cái)產(chǎn)之執(zhí)行”，這三個(gè)章節(jié)與第一章總則和第五章、第六章對(duì)非金錢債權(quán)的執(zhí)行，以及第七章假扣押、假處分的執(zhí)行，共同組成了具有現(xiàn)代理念的強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行法。辯證的研究和分析這部執(zhí)行法的立法基礎(chǔ)、立法條件、立法過程，以及所設(shè)計(jì)的制度框架，可以更清楚地看到它的成功之處及缺陷，為我們現(xiàn)在強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行立法提供有意義的借鑒。
[Abstract]:Enforcement law is the procedural law that prescribes the nominal effect of execution. In the history of our country, there is no independent civil procedure law, let alone a separate enforcement law. It was not until the late Qing Dynasty when the law was revised that the first independent draft of the Enforcement Law was formulated under the influence of western law. Unfortunately, without examination, the Qing court was destroyed. After the founding of the Republic of China in 1912, Because the draft law of compulsory execution was not approved by the late Qing government, it was not cited. In order to deal with civil execution affairs, various civil execution measures were introduced in various jurisdictions one after another, and the form was not uniform and the contents were confused. In view of this, the Beijing government formulated and promulgated the Civil procedure execution rules in 1920, which became the first civil execution law in the history of China. Both the legislative attempt of the late Qing government and the legislative exploration of the Beijing government provided a reference for the enforcement legislation in the later period of the Nanjing National Government.1927, at the beginning of the establishment of the Nanjing Government, By approving and invoking the laws of the former Beijing government, the rules of execution of Civil Proceedings have become the laws and regulations for handling civil execution incidents, and have played an important role before the enactment of the Enforcement Law. In the process of handling civil execution events, not only the experience is summarized and accumulated, but also the defects of the execution rules of Civil procedure are exposed further. Therefore, the Ministry of Justice of the Nanjing National Government issued the supplementary Civil execution measures to supplement the execution rules of Civil Proceedings. It is precisely through the long practice of enforcement that it has laid a practical foundation for the formulation of the compulsory Enforcement Law. The compulsory execution Law was produced under the background of the new and old cultures of modern China and the collision of Chinese and Western cultures. With a distinctive brand of the times. The formulation of this enforcement law not only took into account the existing civil execution laws and regulations from the end of the Qing Dynasty to the Republic of China, but also drew lessons from and absorbed the civil litigation and enforcement laws and regulations of other countries and regions at that time, so it has the characteristics of the times. Without losing the national tradition, the modern civil execution concept has been developed and perfected, and the modern civil execution legal system has been established. This was the result of the efforts of a group of legislative elites at that time. They returned from their studies and brought advanced legal theories, legal concepts and legislative techniques, and promoted the modernization of the Enforcement Law. The framework of the mandatory Enforcement Law was complete. The structure is rigorous, but it does not regard the execution of monetary claims as a separate chapter. Instead, it is divided into "execution of movable property" in chapter two, "execution of immovable property" in chapter three, and "execution of other property" in chapter four. These three chapters, together with chapter one, general principles and chapter five, chapter 6, the enforcement of non-pecuniary claims, and chapter 7, the enforcement of false seizure and false disposition, constitute the enforcement law with modern ideas A dialectical study and analysis of the legislative basis, legislative conditions, legislative process, and the institutional framework designed for the implementation of this law can see more clearly its successes and shortcomings. For us to enforce legislation now to provide meaningful reference.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：江西師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D929;D922.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 何勤華;中國(guó)近代民事訴訟法學(xué)的誕生與成長(zhǎng)[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年02期

2 黃金龍;臺(tái)灣強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行法上的救濟(jì)程序[J];法律適用;1994年09期

3 黃金龍;臺(tái)灣強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行法中的第三人異議之訴[J];法律適用;1996年07期

4 馬登科;;古代民事執(zhí)行制度沿革研究[J];求索;2009年07期

5 馬登科;;近現(xiàn)代民事執(zhí)行制度演進(jìn)的歷史軌跡[J];求索;2011年08期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 楊思勤;兩岸強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行制度之比較研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2009年

本文編號(hào)：2113888