摘要
以合夥團體從事經濟活動者，為社會上普遍的現象，如會計師事務所、律師事務所、建築師事務所等，多有以合夥團體為其執業之型態，然而此類團體因其經濟活動發生糾紛而有訴訟之必要時，得否為訴訟之主體，即有研究之必要。 因此本文就合夥團體於訴訟上所面臨，即當訴訟法與實體法交錯時，所造成之問題作探討，就民法第667條以下合夥之相關規定，於民事訴訟上，因承認合夥團體可以為訴訟之訴訟主體，所產生之相關問題，如合夥團體是否為非法人團體從而具有當事人能力及當事人適格因此可作為訴訟上之當事人之問題從民事訴訟法當事人之概念做詳細之探討，進而論及對合夥團體之訴訟是否有可能造成複數當事人之情形，若有此種情形，則從共同訴訟之類型及法理依據作判斷，探討此種複數當事人之情形係屬何種共同訴訟之類型。 最後，綜合以上之討論，並以合夥團體作為訴訟上之當事人時，法院對於合夥團體所為之判決，既判力與執行力之範圍界限為何，即從主觀範圍與客觀範圍做判斷，用以認定法院對合夥團體為確定判決時，該判決之效力應及於何人與何物，且依民法上對於各合夥人所負之補充性連帶債務之規定，是否會影響判決效力之範圍，做全盤之探討，並提出本文之意見。
並列摘要
It is common that people engage in economic activities by way of partnership in the society, such as accounting firms, law firms, architects, etc. But if it is necessary to have a lawsuit to such firms or groups when they facing some disputes because of their business, it would be an arising problem that whether such groups have the capability to be the litigants. Following from Article 667 of Civil Code, this study researches the arising problems on the connection between procedural law and substantive law. On civil procedural, this study discusses the arising problems if the partnership has the capability to be the litigant, and it will be re-defined the definition of litigant in this study if the partnership belongs to non-juridical group so that it has the capability and standing to be the litigant. Further, it will be discussed whether there would be plural litigants in partnership litigation, and if the answer is yes, it will be judged what kind of joint proceedings it belongs to. Finally, this study will not only review the range of res judicata and enforcement force in partnership litigation judgment, but also make conclusion on whether the rules of supplementary joint debt of partnership in Civil Code would effect the range of effectiveness of the judgment.