论文部分内容阅读
在民事诉讼中,被告往往会针对原告的诉讼请求从程序和实体等方面提出抗辩意见以否定原告的主张或提出减轻、免除其承担民事责任的理由,或对原告提出反请求从而形成反诉。在实务处理中,由于法律对反诉和抗辩并没有作明确的界定和区分,从而导致有的法官混淆了抗辩与反诉应有的界线,有的将应作为抗辩对待的问题作为反诉处理,或者将应作为反诉合并审理的问题而分开审理,一定程度上牺牲了当事人的程序利益,导致当事人合法权益无法得到有效的保护,影响了程序公正和审判效率,这种情况在合同纠纷案件中较为常见本文仅从狭义的角度对合同中涉及实体部分的抗辩和反诉问题,从民事程序选择权保护角度进行探讨,以期对合同纠纷案件审理提供一个新的视角。
In civil litigation, the defendant often defends the plaintiff’s claims from the procedural and substantive aspects to defend the plaintiff’s claim or propose mitigations, relieve his reasons for assuming civil liability, or form a counterclaim against the plaintiff. In practice, because the law does not clearly define and distinguish between counterclaims and defenses, some judges confuse the demarcation line between counterclaims and counterclaims. Some counterattack the issues that should be treated as counterclaims. Should be treated as a counterclaim and merger trial separately, to a certain extent sacrificed the procedural interests of the parties, resulting in the legitimate rights and interests of the parties can not be effectively protected, affecting the procedural fairness and trial efficiency, this situation is more common in contract disputes cases Only from a narrow perspective on the substantive part of the contract defense and counterclaim issues, from the perspective of the protection of civil procedural options to explore the case of contract disputes to provide a new perspective.