【摘要】：“臨時(shí)救濟(jì)”一直是英美法上的概念,但在中國民事訴訟法學(xué)研究中把該概念外延擴(kuò)大,囊括了大陸法系中的類似概念。例如德國民事訴訟法中的“民事保全”,包含“假扣押”與“假處分”,法國民事訴訟法中的“緊急審理裁定”和“依申請(qǐng)作出裁定的程序”,日本民訴法中的“假扣押與假處分的執(zhí)行程序”。因此,臨時(shí)救濟(jì)制度涵蓋了假扣押、假處分、證據(jù)保全以及假執(zhí)行等制度的功能。對(duì)其可定義如下:在訴訟前或訴訟中,為了彌補(bǔ)通常救濟(jì)的滯后性缺陷,以保全將來判決的強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行,暫時(shí)確定糾紛狀態(tài),防止證據(jù)滅失或以后難以取得,滿足當(dāng)事人緊迫需要為目的而采取臨時(shí)措施的制度。雖然立法上尚沒有這種提法，但是學(xué)術(shù)界卻把它們統(tǒng)稱為臨時(shí)性救濟(jì)制度，在我國臨時(shí)性救濟(jì)制度經(jīng)過了這些年的變革和完善，形成了包含財(cái)產(chǎn)保全、行為保全、先予執(zhí)行這一系列制度在內(nèi)的全方面的比較完善的制度。 法律界一直流行著一種法諺“遲到的正義為非正義”在通常的訴訟程序?qū)?quán)利保護(hù)的相對(duì)滯后性這一缺陷在現(xiàn)代社會(huì)暴露的越來越明顯，甚至使訴訟這一救濟(jì)手段成為形式陷入無能、無力的境地的情況下，，設(shè)置臨時(shí)救濟(jì)制度，以解決通常的訴訟程序所不能及時(shí)給予原告救濟(jì)的問題，具有重要意義。它保證了訴訟救濟(jì)的及時(shí)性、有效性，從而也就保證了訴訟公正和效益的實(shí)現(xiàn)。它配合通常的訴訟程序，兩者相結(jié)合，組成了完備、高效的訴訟運(yùn)行機(jī)制，對(duì)保護(hù)當(dāng)事人----尤其是權(quán)利受到侵害的原告的權(quán)益起到了不可低估的作用。 各國都對(duì)臨時(shí)救濟(jì)制度規(guī)定了施用要件。本文通過對(duì)臨時(shí)救濟(jì)制度進(jìn)行英美法系和大陸法系的對(duì)比以發(fā)現(xiàn)區(qū)別，更好的取長補(bǔ)短，取其精華，并對(duì)我國臨時(shí)救濟(jì)制度的運(yùn)行現(xiàn)狀和存在問題進(jìn)行考察，以期對(duì)民事訴訟臨時(shí)救濟(jì)制度的完善提出更加健全和切實(shí)的建議。
[Abstract]:"temporary relief" has always been a concept in Anglo-American law, but it has been extended in the study of Chinese civil procedural law to include similar concepts in the civil law system. For example, "civil protection" in the German Code of Civil procedure includes "false seizure" and "false disposition", "urgent hearing decisions" and "procedures for making decisions on application" in the French Civil procedure Code, The execution procedure of false seizure and false punishment in Japanese Civil procedure Law. Therefore, the interim relief system covers the functions of false seizure, false disposition, evidence preservation and false execution. It can be defined as follows: in order to make up for the lag defects of the usual relief, to preserve the enforcement of future judgments, to determine the state of the dispute temporarily, to prevent the loss of evidence or the difficulty of obtaining the evidence, before or during the proceedings, The system of taking interim measures for the purpose of meeting the urgent needs of the parties. Although there is no such reference in legislation, the academic circles refer to them as temporary relief system. After years of reform and perfection, the temporary relief system in our country has formed including property preservation, act preservation, and so on. The first implementation of this series of systems, including all aspects of a more perfect system. The legal profession has been popular with the legal saying "late justice for injustice" the relative lag in the protection of rights in ordinary proceedings has become increasingly apparent in modern society. It is of great significance to set up a temporary relief system to solve the problem that the litigation procedure can not give the plaintiff relief in time even if the remedy means of litigation becomes the form of incompetence and powerlessness. It ensures the timeliness and effectiveness of litigation relief, thus ensuring the realization of litigation justice and benefit. It cooperates with the common litigation procedure, and combines the two together, forming a complete and efficient litigation operation mechanism, which plays an important role in protecting the rights and interests of the parties, especially the plaintiff whose rights have been infringed. All countries set out the conditions for the application of the temporary relief system. This paper compares the temporary relief system between the Anglo-American law system and the continental law system to find out the difference, to better learn from each other, to take the essence of the temporary relief system, and to investigate the current situation and existing problems of the temporary relief system in our country. In order to improve the system of temporary relief in civil proceedings and put forward more sound and practical recommendations.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D925.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 曾勇;;淺析我國訴訟財(cái)產(chǎn)保全的不足與制度完善[J];法制與社會(huì);2011年23期

2 呂輝;;論日本行為保全制度及其啟示[J];湖北社會(huì)科學(xué);2013年02期

3 楊春華;;對(duì)我國先予執(zhí)行制度立法定位的思考[J];河北法學(xué);2008年11期

4 劉峰江;;民事訴訟臨時(shí)救濟(jì)制度實(shí)質(zhì)要件比較研究[J];湖州師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2010年05期

5 周翠;;論民事訴訟中的臨時(shí)性救濟(jì)制度[J];訴訟法論叢;2001年00期

本文編號(hào)：2178952