本文選題：民事訴訟 + 要件事實(shí)理論��； 參考：《華東政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：要件事實(shí)理論是發(fā)端于日本的、近些年為我國民訴學(xué)界關(guān)注并在一定范圍的司法實(shí)踐中有所應(yīng)用的指導(dǎo)民事訴訟的方法。其根據(jù)民法解釋學(xué)和法律要件分類理論，判明實(shí)體法規(guī)范所規(guī)定的各類事實(shí)，在民事訴訟中究竟由哪一方當(dāng)事人承擔(dān)主張、證明責(zé)任的理論。要件事實(shí)理論引進(jìn)訴訟庭審中能夠指導(dǎo)訴訟場中的兩造及法官的行為，明晰各方的權(quán)利義務(wù)，形成糾紛風(fēng)險(xiǎn)共識，進(jìn)而有效提升庭審質(zhì)量，促進(jìn)法律職業(yè)共同體的培養(yǎng)形成。我國法律職業(yè)共同體的培養(yǎng)工作長期停滯不前，而日本依托于要件事實(shí)理論的統(tǒng)一法曹培養(yǎng)模式將會給中國司法實(shí)務(wù)界帶來些許幫助。 本文通過比較分析、規(guī)范分析和實(shí)證分析等研究方法，對要件事實(shí)理論進(jìn)行系統(tǒng)分析說明。以買賣合同糾紛為切入點(diǎn)，闡釋在實(shí)務(wù)操作中如何具體適用要件事實(shí)理論解析案情，展開攻擊防御體系。并結(jié)合具體庭審實(shí)例，發(fā)掘當(dāng)下我國庭審過程中律師與法官思維差異。希望借助于要件事實(shí)理論整合律師與法官的法律思維，并提出建議從法律基礎(chǔ)教育與統(tǒng)一司法考試等環(huán)節(jié)強(qiáng)化對于要件事實(shí)理論的學(xué)習(xí)和考察，對接形成統(tǒng)一的法律職業(yè)共同體思維方式，以期能對我國法律職業(yè)共同體的培養(yǎng)模式創(chuàng)新有所裨益。 本文共分為四章： 第一章，概述要件事實(shí)理論。通過介紹要件事實(shí)理論的起源，界定相關(guān)概念并闡述其與傳統(tǒng)的民事實(shí)體法與程序法的關(guān)系，明晰要件事實(shí)理論的訴訟場方法論地位。以程序法為視角來簡述要件事實(shí)理論的法理基礎(chǔ)，強(qiáng)調(diào)要件事實(shí)理論以證明責(zé)任理論與主張責(zé)任理論為基礎(chǔ)。 第二章，以買賣合同糾紛訴訟為例，具體探討要件事實(shí)理論在司法實(shí)務(wù)中的應(yīng)用，簡析要件事實(shí)理論中的各個(gè)環(huán)節(jié)的展開方式及相應(yīng)的要件事實(shí)檢索方法，并對買賣合同糾紛訴訟中常見的標(biāo)的物交付、標(biāo)的物風(fēng)險(xiǎn)負(fù)擔(dān)和瑕疵擔(dān)保責(zé)任糾紛類型的適用模式進(jìn)行分析，列明原被告雙方可能展開的攻擊防御體系框架。 第三章，結(jié)合一則實(shí)務(wù)庭審案例，比對在訴訟過程中的具體裁判結(jié)果與要件事實(shí)理論分析案件結(jié)果之間的差異。借此指明律師與法官操作差異的背后是兩者法律思維上的差異。而為了有效提升庭審質(zhì)量就必須協(xié)調(diào)兩者的思維方式，對接形成法律職業(yè)共同體的法律思維。 第四章，對完善我國法律職業(yè)共同體培養(yǎng)方式提出建議。首先，闡述要件事實(shí)理論在訴訟活動中的作用，發(fā)掘要件事實(shí)理論作為訴訟方法論能夠有效對接律師與法官之間的法律思維。其次，，分析了我國當(dāng)下法律職業(yè)共同體無法有效形成的原因。最后建議，從法律基礎(chǔ)教育與統(tǒng)一司法考試著手，加強(qiáng)要件事實(shí)理論的教育考核，強(qiáng)化法律職業(yè)共同體法律思維方式。
[Abstract]:The theory of essential facts is originated in Japan and has been paid attention to by the civil litigation scholars in our country in recent years and has been applied to a certain range of judicial practice to guide civil litigation. According to the theory of hermeneutics of civil law and the classification theory of legal elements, it determines all kinds of facts stipulated in the norms of substantive law, and the theory of which party bears the claim and the burden of proof in civil litigation. The introduction of essential fact theory in litigation court can guide the behavior of the judges in the litigation field, clarify the rights and obligations of all parties, form the consensus of dispute risk, and then effectively improve the quality of trial and promote the formation of legal professional community. The training of the legal professional community in China has been stagnant for a long time, and Japan will bring some help to the judicial practice in China by the unified law training model based on the essential fact theory. Through comparative analysis, normative analysis and empirical analysis, this paper systematically analyzes the theory of essential facts. Taking the dispute of sale and purchase contract as the starting point, this paper explains how to apply the factual theory of the elements in the practical operation to analyze the case and launch the attack defense system. Combining with the concrete trial examples, this paper explores the differences between lawyers and judges in the process of trial in our country. I hope to integrate the legal thinking of lawyers and judges with the help of the theory of facts, and put forward some suggestions to strengthen the study and investigation of the theory of facts from the aspects of basic legal education and unified judicial examination. To form a unified thinking mode of legal professional community in order to benefit the innovation of training mode of legal professional community in our country. This paper is divided into four chapters: The first chapter summarizes the theory of essential facts. By introducing the origin of the theory of essential facts, defining the relevant concepts and expounding its relationship with the traditional civil substantive law and procedural law, the position of litigation field methodology of the theory of essential facts is clarified. From the point of view of procedural law, this paper briefly describes the legal basis of the theory of essential facts, and emphasizes that the theory of essential facts is based on the theory of burden of proof and the theory of claim responsibility. The second chapter, taking the dispute litigation of sale and purchase contract as an example, discusses the application of the essential fact theory in the judicial practice, and briefly analyzes the way of each link in the important element fact theory and the corresponding elements fact retrieval method. This paper also analyzes the applicable models of the subject matter delivery, the subject matter risk burden and the dispute types of defective warranty liability in the litigation of the dispute of sale and purchase contract, and lists the framework of the attack defense system that may be launched by both the original defendant and the original defendant. The third chapter, combining a practical trial case, compares the difference between the specific adjudication result and the fact theory in the litigation process. Therefore, the difference of legal thinking between lawyers and judges is behind the differences between them. In order to effectively improve the quality of trial, we must coordinate their thinking mode and form the legal thinking of legal professional community. The fourth chapter, to perfect our country legal profession community training way puts forward the proposal. First of all, it expounds the role of the theory of essential facts in litigation activities, and explores that the theory of facts of elements, as a methodology of litigation, can effectively connect the legal thinking between lawyers and judges. Secondly, it analyzes the reasons why the legal professional community can not be formed effectively. Finally, it is suggested that starting from the basic law education and the unified judicial examination, we should strengthen the educational examination of the essential facts theory and strengthen the legal thinking mode of the legal professional community.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.1;D923.6

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 段文波;;要件事實(shí)理論——兼論民事法學(xué)教育[J];西南交通大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2012年03期

2 段文波;;要件事實(shí)理論下的攻擊防御體系——兼論民事法學(xué)教育[J];河南財(cái)經(jīng)政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2012年04期

3 徐青森,丁相順;要件事實(shí)與實(shí)務(wù)養(yǎng)成模式比較[J];法律適用;2005年09期

4 任文松;;要件事實(shí)與主張責(zé)任[J];學(xué)海;2006年05期

5 段文波;裁判邏輯與實(shí)定法秩序之維護(hù)——要件事實(shí)論綱[J];西南政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2005年03期

6 章恒筑;夏瑛;;日本要件事實(shí)論綱——一種民事訴訟思維的展開[J];法學(xué)家;2005年03期

7 羅燦;;基本構(gòu)成要件事實(shí)模糊不能定罪[J];人民司法;2011年16期

8 許可;;當(dāng)事人主義訴訟體制下法官審判方法的基礎(chǔ)——要件事實(shí)概說[J];國際關(guān)系學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年01期

9 程麗莊;;要件事實(shí)論與日本法律人培養(yǎng)[J];學(xué)海;2007年01期

10 許可;;論我國合同法要件事實(shí)規(guī)范之完善[J];民事程序法研究;2007年00期

相關(guān)會議論文 前1條

1 鄒碧華;王建平;陳婷婷;;審視與探索——要件審判九步法的提出和運(yùn)用[A];全國法院系統(tǒng)第二十二屆學(xué)術(shù)討論會論文集[C];2011年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前2條

1 北京大學(xué)法學(xué)院副教授 傅郁林;“審”與“判”的邏輯和相應(yīng)技巧[N];人民法院報(bào);2011年

2 天津市河北區(qū)人民法院 高治;無因負(fù)債字據(jù)法律效力探析[N];人民法院報(bào);2008年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 段文波;要件事實(shí)的基礎(chǔ)[D];重慶大學(xué);2007年

2 章恒筑;要件事實(shí)原論[D];四川大學(xué);2006年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 姚佳;要件事實(shí)理論在運(yùn)輸合同糾紛訴訟中的應(yīng)用[D];華東政法大學(xué);2014年

2 楊曉雯;要件事實(shí)理論在融資租賃合同糾紛訴訟中的應(yīng)用[D];華東政法大學(xué);2014年

3 符迪;要件事實(shí)理論在委托合同糾紛訴訟中的應(yīng)用[D];華東政法大學(xué);2014年

4 歐陽川紫;要件事實(shí)理論在買賣合同糾紛訴訟中的應(yīng)用[D];華東政法大學(xué);2014年

5 李清源;要件事實(shí)理論在建設(shè)工程合同糾紛訴訟中的應(yīng)用[D];華東政法大學(xué);2014年

6 周蕾;要件事實(shí)理論在居間合同糾紛訴訟中的應(yīng)用[D];華東政法大學(xué);2014年

7 徐琦;要件事實(shí)理論在租賃合同糾紛訴訟中的應(yīng)用[D];華東政法大學(xué);2014年

8 涂艷;民間借款合同糾紛的要件事實(shí)訴訟方法之考察[D];華東政法大學(xué);2013年

9 陳希;要件事實(shí)理論在借款合同糾紛訴訟中的應(yīng)用[D];華東政法大學(xué);2014年

10 李文娜;美國聯(lián)邦民事合理訴答標(biāo)準(zhǔn)研究[D];山東大學(xué);2013年

本文編號：1873576