本文選題：群體性糾紛 + 示范訴訟��； 參考：《山東大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著社會轉(zhuǎn)型以及利益格局調(diào)整,社會矛盾呈現(xiàn)出主體多元、數(shù)量多發(fā)、訴求多樣的發(fā)展態(tài)勢,愈來愈多的權(quán)利義務(wù)關(guān)系與矛盾糾紛以群體案件的形式進(jìn)入司法領(lǐng)域。目前,群體性糾紛已成我國亟需解決的痼疾之一,群體性事件時常見諸報端,毋須諱言,公民對于司法的需求以及公正的期待日益增強(qiáng),而且群體糾紛案件解決的效率與質(zhì)量,亦是考驗(yàn)我國各級政府以及司法機(jī)關(guān)的試金石與繩墨航標(biāo)。 世界諸多國家也都逐步構(gòu)建了群體糾紛的解決機(jī)制,20世紀(jì)初德國的司法實(shí)踐逐步興起了示范訴訟制度,并被諸多國家借鑒移植。我國在1991年《民事訴訟法》中制定了代表人訴訟制度,但是,反觀二十多年的司法實(shí)踐,代表人訴訟制度幾乎被束之高閣,踐行效用有限,并沒有取得預(yù)期效果。因此,如何及時高效地解決群體糾紛、如何減少抑或提起預(yù)防群體侵權(quán)案件的發(fā)生、如何持續(xù)彌補(bǔ)優(yōu)化現(xiàn)有的群體糾紛化解機(jī)制、如何借鑒示范訴訟制度、如何切實(shí)實(shí)現(xiàn)法律效果與社會效果的有效統(tǒng)一,凡此諸多現(xiàn)實(shí)癥結(jié)正日益逼近各國政府與司法實(shí)務(wù)界以及法學(xué)理論研究者。 本文主要包括四部分,第一部分主要是對示范訴訟制度的概念、特征、類型、理論基礎(chǔ)以及價值等基本內(nèi)容進(jìn)行了詳實(shí)闡述。第二部分主要是對示范訴訟制度與群體糾紛案件的其他訴訟制度進(jìn)行了細(xì)致的比較分析。第三部分主要是以美國、英國、德國以及日本的示范訴訟制度進(jìn)行了考證梳理,以此明晰不同國家關(guān)于示范訴訟制度具體規(guī)定與司法實(shí)踐的現(xiàn)實(shí)運(yùn)行規(guī)律。第四部分首先分析了我國目前解決群體糾紛案件的現(xiàn)狀以及代表人訴訟制度與示范訴訟制度在我國司法實(shí)務(wù)中的適用狀況,然后闡述了我國構(gòu)建優(yōu)化示范訴訟制度的必要性與可行性,在此基礎(chǔ)上并探索性地提出了我國構(gòu)建示優(yōu)化范訴訟制度的些許具體建議抑或司法措施,希冀通過構(gòu)建多元糾紛解決機(jī)制,統(tǒng)籌法律規(guī)定、司法實(shí)踐以及社情民意,號準(zhǔn)案件切入點(diǎn),做好群眾工作,攻堅克難,逐步破解群體糾紛難題,并以此可以逐步切實(shí)地對我國在群體糾紛解決層面的司法實(shí)踐有所微觀助推抑或些許的理論裨益。本文可能突破之處在于針對我國構(gòu)建示優(yōu)化范訴訟制度所提的的些許具體建議抑或司法措施,但其合理性以及可操作性仍需探討與司法實(shí)踐檢驗(yàn)。
[Abstract]:With the social transformation and the adjustment of the interest pattern, the social contradiction presents the development trend of the main body pluralism, the quantity is many, the demand is diverse, more and more rights and obligations relations and disputes enter the judicial field in the form of group cases. At present, group disputes have become one of the chronic diseases that need to be solved in our country. Mass incidents often appear in the newspapers. Needless to say, citizens' demand for justice and their expectations for justice are increasing day by day, and the efficiency and quality of resolving group disputes cases are also increasing. Is also a test of all levels of government and judicial organs of the touchstone and ink navigation marks. Many countries in the world have gradually constructed a mechanism for resolving group disputes. In the early 20th century, the judicial practice of Germany gradually rose a model litigation system, and was transplanted by many countries. In 1991, our country established the representative litigation system in the Civil procedure Law. However, after more than 20 years of judicial practice, the representative litigation system is almost shelved, the effectiveness of the practice is limited, and it has not achieved the expected results. Therefore, how to solve group disputes in a timely and efficient manner, how to reduce or raise the prevention of group infringement cases, how to continuously make up for and optimize the existing mechanism of resolving group disputes, how to learn from the model litigation system, How to realize the effective unification of the legal effect and the social effect is approaching the governments of various countries, the judicial practice circle and the researchers of the legal theory day by day. This paper mainly includes four parts. The first part is to elaborate the concept, characteristics, types, theoretical basis and value of the model litigation system. The second part mainly analyzes the model litigation system and other litigation systems of group dispute cases. The third part is mainly based on the United States, Britain, Germany and Japan model litigation system for textual research, in order to clarify the specific provisions of different countries on the model litigation system and judicial practice of the actual operation of the law. The fourth part first analyzes the current situation of solving group disputes in China and the application of representative litigation system and model litigation system in the judicial practice of our country. Then it expounds the necessity and feasibility of constructing and optimizing the model litigation system in our country, and then puts forward some concrete suggestions or judicial measures to construct the model litigation system of our country. It is hoped that through the establishment of a pluralistic dispute resolution mechanism, the overall planning of legal provisions, judicial practice and social sentiment and public opinion, the entry point for the registration of cases, to do a good job of mass work, to overcome difficulties, and to gradually solve the difficult problems of group disputes, In this way, we can gradually and practically contribute to the judicial practice in the level of group dispute resolution or some theoretical benefits. The possible breakthrough of this paper lies in some concrete suggestions or judicial measures for constructing the system of demonstration and optimization of normal litigation in our country, but its rationality and maneuverability still need to be explored and tested in judicial practice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 肖建華;群體訴訟與我國代表人訴訟的比較研究[J];比較法研究;1999年02期

2 周安平;;優(yōu)勝劣汰與優(yōu)勝劣不汰——人類社會生存競爭規(guī)則的道德底線[J];法商研究;2007年03期

3 肖建國;謝俊;;示范性訴訟及其類型化研究——以美國、英國、德國為對象的比較法考察[J];法學(xué)雜志;2008年01期

4 楊嚴(yán)炎;;示范訴訟的分析與借鑒[J];法學(xué);2007年03期

5 王利民;郭明龍;;論“和諧社會”的私法構(gòu)建[J];河北法學(xué);2006年02期

6 章武生;楊嚴(yán)炎;;我國群體訴訟的立法與司法實(shí)踐[J];法學(xué)研究;2007年02期

7 王福華;民事判決既判力:由傳統(tǒng)到現(xiàn)代的嬗變[J];法學(xué)論壇;2001年06期

8 王福華;;代表人訴訟之替代改革[J];上海交通大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2006年05期

9 章武生;張大海;;論德國《投資者典型訴訟法》[J];環(huán)球法律評論;2008年03期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 張大海;德國群體訴訟制度研究[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2008年

，

本文編號：1856205