论文部分内容阅读
本文分析了诉讼时效制度的功能,并从这一角度对诉讼时效效力的四大立法模式进行了评价,认为抗辩权发生主义最为合理。2007年《最高人民法院关于审理民事案件适用诉讼时效制度若干问题的规定》出台后,我国从胜诉权发生主义转变为抗辩权发生主义。依抗辩权发生主义,指时效届满后,实体权利和诉权均不消灭,只有义务人可以依时效取得拒绝履行的抗辩权。这一转变不仅进一步完善了我国诉讼时效制度,并且符合大多数国家的立法经验。
This article analyzes the function of the system of limitation of action, and from this perspective, it evaluates the four legislative modes of the limitation of action effect, and considers that the right of occurrence of the right of defense is the most reasonable. After the promulgation of the Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Limitation System for the Trial of Civil Cases in 2007, China changed from the supremacy of victory to the right of defense. According to the rebuttal right, after the expiration of the limitation period, neither the entity’s rights nor the right of action disappear. Only the obligor can obtain the right of defense refusing to perform on time. This change not only further perfects the limitation of action system in our country, but also meets the legislative experience in most countries.