本文選題：審級制度 + 初審法院��； 參考：《江西財經(jīng)大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：我國以四級兩審終審制為主體的民事訴訟審級制度,由于在確立之初缺乏充足的理論準備和實踐經(jīng)驗積累,在審級制度概念以及價值追求上未形成統(tǒng)一認識,以致在后來長期的司法實踐中存在終審不終、地區(qū)間裁判各異、纏訴信訪等嚴重影響司法公信力的突出問題。本文從分析審級制度概念入手,深入分析我國民事訴訟審級制度發(fā)展脈絡(luò),比較研究兩大法系民事訴訟審級制度規(guī)則體系,重新界定了審級制度作為體系化概念的內(nèi)涵與外延,揭示了我國民事訴訟審級制度的形成軌跡與生成規(guī)律,著重研究了兩大法系在審級制度趨同背景下所反映的共同價值追求,并在此基礎(chǔ)上提出固定初審管轄法院、建立三審終審、界定初審及上訴審審判范圍等改革設(shè)想。審級制度與終審制度不是同一概念,從外延上看,審級制度應(yīng)作為一個體系化概念而存在,終審制度只是這個體系中最突出的一個環(huán)節(jié)。民事訴訟審級制度應(yīng)包括法院建制、民事案件一審管轄、上下審級的審理范圍、民事案件的終審程序、終審判決的糾錯程序等五個方面的內(nèi)容,在一國法院建制相對固定的情況下,以初審法院的一審管轄為審級制度的邏輯起點。對審級制度概念的認識不足,造成我國當前立法與司法的沖突嚴重,法院行政級別代替了審級層級,再審申訴案件居高不下,終審程序形同虛設(shè),地方保護主義借此干預(yù)司法,法院的司法權(quán)威受到巨大挑戰(zhàn)。我國古代審級制度內(nèi)容完整,對審判機關(guān)而言有復(fù)審、上請制度,實現(xiàn)上下審級之間的內(nèi)在監(jiān)督;對當事人而言可逐級上訴,且不限審級,以此實現(xiàn)上下審級的外部監(jiān)督;而作為有效補充的直訴制度,當事人通過這種非常規(guī)上訴方式直接向更高審級單位提出上訴,以滿足我國百姓自古就有的對審級利益的樸素追求。經(jīng)過清末變法,四級三審制的近代審級制度初具雛形,民國先后歷經(jīng)北洋政府和南京政府,政局幾經(jīng)周折,但還是始終保留了 “三審終審制”的審級制度模型,盡管在司法實踐過程中因為受戰(zhàn)亂、經(jīng)費、人員等因素的影響,審級制度有所變通,但“三審終審制”的基本構(gòu)造仍作為基本審判制度得以保留。現(xiàn)行四級兩審終審制審級架構(gòu)經(jīng)過大分區(qū)法院存廢、終審程序裁撤以及行署法院向中級法院轉(zhuǎn)變等立法和司法實踐后得以建立,但存在實踐經(jīng)驗積累不夠、理論準備不足、過分遷就地理因素等先天弊端。以英、美和法、德為代表的兩大法系國家,在民事訴訟審級制度的具體內(nèi)容上雖不盡相同,但審級制度均以體系化架構(gòu)而存在,并在規(guī)則體系方面卻呈現(xiàn)出一審案件集中管轄、固定上訴審法院職能、區(qū)分初審、上訴審審判范圍、設(shè)置高級法院或最高法院三審終審的基本構(gòu)造和實行再審準入制度等趨同特征。兩大法系趨同的審級制度設(shè)計反映出共同的構(gòu)造原理,包括:維護程序獨立價值,保證程序功能的有效發(fā)揮;實現(xiàn)司法統(tǒng)一性價值,保證法律實施的統(tǒng)一性和權(quán)威性;保障司法正確性價值,確保上下審級之間的相互監(jiān)督與制約;協(xié)調(diào)司法的終局性與正當性,實現(xiàn)終審判決終局效力與終審程序?qū)徏壏峙涞挠袡C結(jié)合。而這些構(gòu)造原理,對我國民事訴訟審級制度改革具有重要指導(dǎo)意義。我國民事訴訟審級制度的重構(gòu),首先應(yīng)從改革初審法院管轄權(quán)開始,實現(xiàn)上、下級法院層級優(yōu)化;其次應(yīng)建立四級三審終審程序構(gòu)造,相應(yīng)地區(qū)分初審與上訴審的審判范圍,實現(xiàn)上下審級之間的職能優(yōu)化;再次還應(yīng)改革民事再審程序,讓再審回歸當事人訴權(quán)范圍,設(shè)置再審準入制度,維護終審判決的終局效力,從根本上提升法院的司法公信力。
[Abstract]:In our country, the system of civil litigation trial, which is the main body of the four class and two trial final trial system, has not formed a unified understanding of the concept of the trial level system and the pursuit of value in the early period of the establishment, so that there is no final trial in the later judicial practice, the judges are different in the region, and the complaint letters and visits are strict. This article, starting with the analysis of the concept of the trial level system, analyzes the development of the civil litigation trial level system in our country, compares the rules system of the two legal system of civil litigation, and redefines the connotation and extension of the system as the concept of the system, and reveals the civil procedure trial level system in our country. The formation path and the law of formation of the degree are focused on the study of the common value pursuit reflected by the two legal systems in the context of the convergence of the trial level system, and on this basis, we propose a fixed initial trial jurisdiction court, establish the final trial of the three trial, and define the scope of the initial trial and the scope of the appeal trial. The concept of the trial level system and the final trial system is not the same concept, from the extension of the system. On the other hand, the system of trial class should exist as a systematic concept. The system of final trial is only one of the most prominent links in this system. The system of civil procedure trial level should include five aspects, namely, the establishment of the court, the jurisdiction of the first instance of the civil case, the scope of the trial at the upper and lower levels, the final trial procedure of the civil case, the error correction procedure of the final judgment, etc. When the establishment of a country's court is relatively fixed, the first instance jurisdiction of the first instance court is the logical starting point of the trial level system. The lack of understanding of the concept of the trial level system leads to the serious conflict between the current legislation and the judicature in our country. The administrative level of the court has replaced the level of the trial level, the case of retrial appeals is high, the procedure of final trial is empty and the local protection is protected. In order to intervene in the judicature, the judicial authority of the court has been greatly challenged. The ancient trial level system in our country has a complete content, retrial for the judicial organs, and the system is requested to realize the internal supervision between the upper and lower levels; to the parties, it can be appealed and not limited to the level of the trial level, in order to achieve the external supervision of the upper and lower levels; and as an effective supplement. Through this unconventional appeal, the parties directly appealed to the higher trial level units to meet the simple pursuit of the interests of the people of our country from ancient times. After the late Qing Dynasty, the modern trial level system of the four level and three trial system had begun to take shape. The Republic of China was successively passed through the Beiyang government and the Nanjing government, and the political situation was a few times. But still retained the "three trial system" system model of the trial level, although in the process of judicial practice, because of the influence of war, funds, personnel and other factors, the trial level system has been changed, but the basic structure of the "final trial system of the three trial" is still retained as the basic trial system. The existing structure of the current four level two trial final trial system is large. The two major legal system countries represented by the British, the United States and the law and Germany are in the concrete inside of the civil litigation system. Although the capacity is not the same, the system of trial grade exists in a systematic framework, and in the rule system, it presents the centralized jurisdiction of the first instance cases, fixed the appeal and court function, distinguish the first instance, the scope of the appeal trial, set the basic structure of the three trial of the Supreme Court or the Supreme Court, and the system of the admittance of the retrial, and so on. Two The design of the trial level system of the convergence of the law system reflects the common structure principle, including: maintaining the independent value of the procedure, ensuring the effective function of the procedure, realizing the value of judicial unity, ensuring the unity and authority of the legal implementation, guaranteeing the value of the judicial correctness, ensuring the mutual supervision and restriction between the upper and lower levels, and coordinating the end of the judicature. In order to realize the organic combination of the final validity of the final adjudication and the distribution of the final trial procedure, these structural principles have important guiding significance to the reform of the civil procedure trial level system in our country. Secondly, we should establish the structure of the final trial procedure of the four level and three trial. The corresponding area should be divided into the trial scope of the first trial and the appeal trial, and the function optimization between the upper and lower trial level should be realized; the civil retrial procedure should be reformed to return the retrial to the litigant scope, set up the retrial admittance system, and maintain the final validity of the final trial and fundamentally improve the court's division. Legal credibility.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：江西財經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D925.1

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 劉忠;;四級兩審制的發(fā)生和演化[J];法學(xué)研究;2015年04期

2 王建學(xué);;地方各級人民法院憲法地位的規(guī)范分析[J];法學(xué)研究;2015年04期

3 孫祥壯;;美國法院糾正錯誤終局判決及其對我國的啟示[J];法律適用;2015年07期

4 王慶廷;;四級人民法院的角色定位及功能配置[J];中州學(xué)刊;2015年05期

5 何貞斌;;我國民事訴訟審級制度與二審具體問題研究[J];四川師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2014年04期

6 韓靜茹;;錯位與回歸:民事再審制度之反思——以民事程序體系的新發(fā)展為背景[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2013年02期

7 陳杭平;;比較法視野中的中國民事審級制度改革[J];華東政法大學(xué)學(xué)報;2012年04期

8 江必新;;民事復(fù)審程序類型化研究[J];法學(xué)家;2012年02期

9 于明;;司法審級中的信息、組織與治理——從中國傳統(tǒng)司法的“上控”與“審轉(zhuǎn)”切入[J];法學(xué)家;2011年02期

10 聶鑫;;近代中國審級制度的變遷:理念與現(xiàn)實[J];中外法學(xué);2010年02期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 李大雪;二戰(zhàn)后德國民事訴訟法之改革研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號：1806474