大陆法系和英美法系国家民事诉讼纠纷解决模式分别表现为职权主义和当事人主义诉讼模式。当事人主义模式更多地体现对抗辩论,而职权主义模式要求法官在民事诉讼审理过程中行使释明权。对抗式辩论原则的实现与法官行使释明权之间存在着一定程度的冲突。对此,应加强律师代理民事诉讼纠纷,限制法官行使释明权的范围,使民事诉讼向当事人主义诉讼模式转变,实现对抗式辩论原则与法官释明权之间的良性互动。 Continental legal system and common law countries, civil litigation dispute resolution model respectively as a power of attorney and adversarial litigation mode. The doctrine of party doctrine reflects confrontation more, while the mode of power doctrine requires judges to exercise the right of interpretation in the process of civil litigation. There is a certain degree of conflict between the implementation of the adversarial debate principle and the exercise of the right of interpretation by judges. In this regard, we should strengthen the lawyer’s representation in the civil litigation, restrict the scope of the judge’s exercise of the right of interpretation, change the civil litigation to litigant litigation mode, and realize the benign interaction between the adversarial debate principle and the judge’s right of interpretation.