论文部分内容阅读
对于第三人参加诉讼时的判决效力范围问题,学理上存在颇多争议,大陆法系传统理论采参加效力说,认为本诉确定判决对诉讼参加人发生参加效力而非既判力。在纠纷一次解决的绝对化追求下,责任追究功能成为我国无独立请求权第三人制度设计和适用的核心,导致这一制度与大陆法系的诉讼参加制度发生了偏离,使得判决效力问题变得十分复杂而难以沿用辅助参加效力。对此,有必要回归到既判力原理的立场,结合无独立请求权第三人参加诉讼的不同形态,对判决效力范围予以具体分析和检视,以求既有制度与理论的尽量自洽。
There are many controversies about the scope of judgments on the third party’s participation in litigation. The traditional theory of civil law system adopts the effectiveness of the argument, saying that the lawsuit confirms the participation of the participants in the litigation rather than the res judicata. With the pursuit of absolute solution to a dispute, the responsibility-seeking function becomes the core of the design and application of the third party system without independent claim in our country. As a result, this system departs from the litigation system of civil law system, It is very complicated and difficult to follow the auxiliary to participate in the effectiveness. In this regard, it is necessary to return to the principle of res judicata, combining with the different forms of participation of third parties without independent claims, to analyze and examine the scope of the judgment effectively so as to ensure the self-consistent existing systems and theories.