本文關(guān)鍵詞： 民事執(zhí)行 案外人 權(quán)利救濟(jì) 第三人撤銷之訴　出處：《吉林大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：在民事執(zhí)行工作中，由于執(zhí)行工作的特點決定了執(zhí)行工作必須迅速、及時，只能依據(jù)外觀表象判斷執(zhí)行標(biāo)的的權(quán)屬，一般在被執(zhí)行人占有使用執(zhí)行標(biāo)的的情形下即認(rèn)定其為執(zhí)行標(biāo)的物的所有人；另外由于現(xiàn)階段執(zhí)行部門工作人員的業(yè)務(wù)水平參差不齊，導(dǎo)致了執(zhí)行程序中，案外人權(quán)益受到執(zhí)行機(jī)構(gòu)強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行行為侵害的情形屢見不鮮。一方面，案外人的合法權(quán)益需要保護(hù)，另一方面，被執(zhí)行人的法律義務(wù)應(yīng)該履行。這就需要我國法律體系中要具備完善的案外人救濟(jì)制度，，使得法律的公平與公正得到實現(xiàn)。 司法實踐中，隨著法律關(guān)系的復(fù)雜化和多樣化，在執(zhí)行工作中，案外人利用訴訟程序惡意拖延執(zhí)行的情形越來越多，申請執(zhí)行人與被執(zhí)行人在執(zhí)行程序中惡意串通騙取法院生效裁定，損害第三人合法權(quán)益的情形在全國各地均有出現(xiàn)。目前，在我國執(zhí)行程序中，案外人對執(zhí)行標(biāo)的主張實體權(quán)利的，可以提出執(zhí)行異議保護(hù)自己的合法權(quán)利；當(dāng)案外人的書面異議被執(zhí)行機(jī)構(gòu)駁回后，如果與原判決、裁定無關(guān)的，可以向執(zhí)行法院提起執(zhí)行異議之訴；如果與原判決、裁定有關(guān)的，可以申請再審；2012年《民事訴訟法》再次修改又確立了第三人撤銷之訴制度。我國現(xiàn)階段對案外人權(quán)益保護(hù)提供了多方位的權(quán)利救濟(jì)途徑，如何細(xì)化和完善現(xiàn)有的制度，使其既能防止惡意拖延執(zhí)行的發(fā)生，又能最大化的發(fā)揮職能保護(hù)案外人的合法權(quán)益，成為現(xiàn)階段案外人權(quán)利救濟(jì)實務(wù)研究方面的重點。 本文第一部分介紹了民事執(zhí)行案外人救濟(jì)制度的基本問題、歷史變遷和演變，從民事執(zhí)行案外人救濟(jì)制度的概念、設(shè)立的必要性及遵循的原則，民事訴訟法的兩次修改著手，對民事執(zhí)行案外人權(quán)利救濟(jì)制度的現(xiàn)狀做出梳理。第二部分分析了我國民事執(zhí)行案外人權(quán)利救濟(jì)制度的缺陷，對案外人執(zhí)行異議前置程序、執(zhí)行異議之訴、案外人申請再審、第三人撤銷之訴制度的缺陷分別予以詳細(xì)闡述；第三部分在比較分析各國及地區(qū)，尤其是與我國相近的大陸法系國家對案外人權(quán)利救濟(jì)制度規(guī)定的基礎(chǔ)上，提出了對我國民事執(zhí)行案外人權(quán)利救濟(jì)制度的完善構(gòu)想，建議取消不合理的執(zhí)行異議前置審查程序，對執(zhí)行異議之訴制度予以完善，對案外人申請再審制度進(jìn)行更合理的理論配置，同時對第三人撤銷之訴程序進(jìn)一步細(xì)化和厘清。但是考慮目前我國民事執(zhí)行案外人救濟(jì)制度設(shè)置上多種程序并存的現(xiàn)狀，不僅應(yīng)該著力于對制度的完善，同時應(yīng)該強(qiáng)調(diào)各程序之間的相互銜接，使各程序之間相互配合共同發(fā)揮保護(hù)案外人合法權(quán)益的職能。
[Abstract]:In the civil execution work, because of the characteristics of the execution work, the execution work must be swift and timely, and the ownership of the execution object can only be judged according to the appearance. In general, the subject matter of execution is recognized as the owner of the subject matter of execution if the executor has possession of the object of execution; In addition, due to the uneven operational level of the staff of the executive department at the present stage, it is common to see that the rights and interests of the outsider in the case are infringed by the enforcement agency in the execution procedure. On the one hand. The legitimate rights and interests of the outsider need to be protected, on the other hand, the legal obligations of the executor should be fulfilled. So that the fairness and justice of the law can be realized. In judicial practice, with the complexity and diversification of the legal relationship, in the implementation of the case outsiders use the proceedings to delay the implementation of the situation more and more maliciously. Application executor and the executor in the execution procedure maliciously colluding to obtain the court effective ruling, damage the legitimate rights and interests of the third party has appeared in all parts of the country. At present, in the execution procedure in our country. If an outsider claims substantive rights to the object of execution, he may raise an executive objection to protect his legal rights; When the written objection of an outsider to the case is rejected by the enforcement agency, if it has nothing to do with the original judgment or ruling, it may file an enforcement objection action with the enforcement court; If it is related to the original judgment or ruling, it may apply for retrial; In 2012, the Civil procedure Law again amended and established the system of third party revocation. At this stage, our country provides a multi-faceted right relief way for the protection of the rights and interests of outsiders in the case, and how to refine and improve the existing system. It can not only prevent the maliciously delaying the execution but also maximize the function of protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the outsider in the case. It has become the focus of the practical research on the right relief of the outsider at the present stage. The first part of this paper introduces the basic problems, historical changes and evolution of the external relief system of civil execution cases, the concept of the external relief system of civil execution cases, the necessity of setting up and the principles to be followed. The second part analyzes the defects of the remedy system of the rights of outsiders in civil enforcement cases. The defects of the system of dissent by the third party shall be elaborated in detail on the basis of the prior procedure of the dissent, the execution of the dissenting action, the application for retrial of the outsider, and the revocation of the action by the third party. The third part of the comparative analysis of countries and regions, especially similar to China's civil law countries on the basis of the relief system of the rights of the foreign parties to the case on the basis of the provisions. This paper puts forward the idea of perfecting the relief system of the rights of outsiders in civil enforcement cases in our country, and proposes to abolish the unreasonable procedure of pre-examination of executive dissent, and to perfect the system of action of execution dissent. A more reasonable theoretical allocation of the system of application for retrial is carried out. At the same time, the procedure of the third party revocation is further refined and clarified. However, considering the existing situation of a variety of procedures on the establishment of the external relief system of civil execution cases in China, we should not only focus on the perfection of the system. At the same time, we should emphasize the connection of each procedure, make each procedure cooperate with each other and jointly play the function of protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the outsider in the case.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.1

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 ;法院執(zhí)行案外人財產(chǎn)是否合法[J];新疆人大(漢文);2013年08期

2 曹天健;;成都“英倫世家”46畝土地執(zhí)行案懸疑[J];法人;2012年08期

3 ;十四種情形可確認(rèn)法院違法[J];四川黨的建設(shè)(城市版);2004年10期

4 ;[J];;年期

5 ;[J];;年期

6 ;[J];;年期

7 ;[J];;年期

8 ;[J];;年期

9 ;[J];;年期

10 ;[J];;年期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前6條

1 ;如此執(zhí)行案外人財產(chǎn)公正嗎？[N];法制日報;2001年

2 本報記者 孫海寧;強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行案外人財產(chǎn)違法[N];法制日報;2002年

3 郭春雨 王伯光 記者 趙聯(lián)洗;全面實施“八個嚴(yán)禁”[N];吉林日報;2004年

4 記者　王斗斗;查處一批“觸電”法官[N];法制日報;2006年

5 郭春雨 王伯光 陸海泉 記者 趙聯(lián)洗;省法院出臺“七條禁令”“八個嚴(yán)禁”[N];吉林日報;2004年

6 ;重慶法院系統(tǒng)堅持執(zhí)法為民[N];人民日報;2003年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 夏丹;論我國民事執(zhí)行案外人的權(quán)利救濟(jì)[D];吉林大學(xué);2014年

本文編號：1489812