頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 民事訴訟中當事人之具體化義務=The "Substantiierungspflicht" in Civil Procedure |
---|---|
作 者 | 姜世明; | 書刊名 | 政大法學評論 |
卷 期 | 88 民94.12 |
頁 次 | 頁297-363 |
分類號 | 586.116 |
關鍵詞 | 辯論主義; 摸索證明; 舉證責任; 證據主題; 具體化義務; 審理集中化; The adversarial principle; Fishing expedition; The obligation of telling the truth; Theme of evidence; Burden of proof; Substantiierungspflicht; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 在民事訴訟上,原告起訴之訴訟標的乃被要求應特定,而訴之聲明亦被要求應確定,其理由主要係為使攻防對象特定、程序保障、判決效力範圍預測及使執行可能等因素,此乃為一般所共認者。但有疑慮者係,當事人於訴訟中所為主張、爭執及證據聲明之關於事實之陳述,是否可容許當事人抽象陳述?是否應要求當事人具體化為之?就此一問題,在我國較少論及;其在德國,則因鑑於此一問題足以影響以辯論主義(或修正辯論主義)作為建構民事訴訟法之基礎之程序運作有效性,其學理及實務己存在不少之見解。 基本上,具體化義務乃對於訴訟程序中陳迷者之相對人防禦權及證人權益之保障、濫訴及無意義證據調查之防免、訴訟促進、爭點整理及法院對於起訴一貫性及抗辯重要性之審查等具有重要之意義。對此一問題之研究,應有助於我國民事訴訟法新近修正目標(亦即審理集中化)之達成。 本文擬借助於德國法之發展經驗,就具體化義務之定義、本質、法基礎、功能及其實質內容、界限及效果等問題加以討論,而對於此一理論所可能面臨之基本難題,亦將加以提示及檢討,希有助於我國民事程序法理論發展之拓深及具體化。 |
英文摘要 | Regarding civil litigation, the subject matter of a claim is supposed to be specific, and the allegation should also be precise. The reason is mainly to make the objective of the defense specific and to keep the procedure protected, the range of effect of judgment predictable, and the execution of decisions possible. The above factors have been commonly recognized. However, the perplexing issue is whether the parties shall be allowed to make abstract statements of fact in their claim, argument, and provision of evidence, or shall they make them concrete. Such an issue is rarely discussed in Taiwan. In this article, with the support of the developmental experience of German laws, I intend to expound on the issues regarding the definition, essence, jurisprudence, function, actual content, limits and effects of the duty of embodiment. I will also proffer some advice and review the basic problems for which this theory may account as well. Hopefully, this article shall prove helpful to the development of the Civil Procedure theory in Taiwan. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。