民事程序法

Civil Procedure Law

許士宦(Shu-Huan Shyuu)

《臺大法學論叢》 39卷2期 (2010/06) Pp. 83-100

https://doi.org/10.6199/NTULJ.2010.39.02.05

摘要

新修正之民事訴訟法已然對民事訴訟制度進行通盤性、徹底性改革，不僅就民事訴訟上當事人兩造間及其與法院間之任務分擔重為分配，而且就訴訟審理方式改採集中審理制度，既更動向來適認之程序基本結構，又改變傳統相沿成習之訴訟審理模式。審判實務理應認知新法之立法旨趣及規範目的，據以更新傳統的審判活動，調適從來判例、決議所採法律見解。本文旨在分析、檢討最高法院2009年作成之裁判意旨所示明民事訴訟上當事人之權利及義務為何，其呈現新法施行後實際訴訟中當事人之具體形象究竟如何，藉此驗證新法是否已落實於審判實務，而被充分認知及發揮其所具民事司法改革之意義及機能。

關鍵字

程序權保障 ； 闡明義務 ； 訴訟促進義務 ； 陳述義務

並列摘要

The amendatory civil procedure law has totally and thoroughly made a revolution in civil procedure system. There is not only a rearrangement of duties between parties and the court, but also the adoption of system of concentrated trial in civil procedure. It changes the ordinary structure of civil procedure and the traditional trial mode. The court practice should become conscious of the legislative objective of new law in order to renew the traditional trial activity and adjust the legal understandings of precedents. This article aims at analyzing precedents of the Supreme Court in 2009 and surveying parties' rights and duties in amendatory civil procedure that precedents indicate. By this analysis, we could verify that whether the amendatory law is carried out in court practice and fully displaying its meanings and functions in the revolution of civil judiciary.

並列關鍵字

protection of civil procedure rights ； duty of clarification ； duty of promotion of trial ； duty of statement

參考文獻

邱聯恭(2005)。程序利益保護論。台北:元照。

許士宦(2003)。程序保障與闡明義務。台北:新學林。

許士宦(2009)。民事訴訟法之最新修正。台灣法學雜誌。122，17。

許士宦(2009)。民事訴訟法之二○○九年六月修正。台灣法學雜誌。133，20。

司法院編(2000)。民事訴訟法部分條文對照表暨總說明。台北:司法院。