上诉请求拘束原则的误识及应对
Misrecognition and Countermeasures of the Principle of Restraint of Request for Appeal
摘要: 我国并不存在上诉请求拘束原则,将二审审理范围以及再审事由的规定作为其法律依据,是对审理范围和裁判范围这对概念的混淆。实事求是的审判理念和程序保障观念薄弱是造成这一现象的主要原因。为此应在保留当前二审审理范围规定的同时,增加关于上诉请求约束裁判范围的立法,构成对法官权力的双重限制。
Abstract:
There is no the principle of restraining the request of appeal in China. To take the scope of the se-cond trial and the provisions on the cause of retrial as its legal basis is to confuse the concepts of the scope of the trial and the scope of the judgment. The main reasons for this phenomenon are the weak concepts of seeking truth from facts and procedural guarantee. To this end, while keeping the scope of the present second trial, the legislation on the scope of the decision on appeal should be increased, which constitutes a double restriction on the power of the judge.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
[日]高桥宏志. 重点讲义民事诉讼法[M]. 张卫平, 许可, 译. 北京: 法律出版社, 2007: 443.
|
|
[2]
|
陈杭平. 民事第二审审理范围及其例外[J]. 国家检察官学院学报, 2018(4): 156.
|
|
[3]
|
熊晓彪. 事实, 规范与判决正当性——“郑州电梯劝阻吸烟案”评析[J]. 西部法律评论, 2018, 135(5): 128-137.
|
|
[4]
|
张家勇. 也论“电梯劝阻吸烟案”的法律适用[J]. 法治研究, 2018(2): 33.
|
|
[5]
|
许可. 论当事人主义诉讼模式在我国法上的新进展[J]. 当代法学, 2016(3): 6-15.
|
|
[6]
|
付永雄, 黎蜀宁, 宋宗宇. 我国民事上诉制度改革研究[J]. 重庆大学学报(社会科学版), 2003(4): 96-101.
|
|
[7]
|
张卫平. 转换的逻辑: 民事诉讼体制转型分析[M]. 法律出版社, 2007: 170-190.
|