委托调解原论

Survey on Court-entrusted Mediation

委托调解是指法院在立案前或立案后将民事案件委托特定的组织或个人主持进行的调解。截至目前,委托调解仍以司法解释为依据,缺乏正式立法层面的制度确认。不同地区、不同法院的委托调解实践呈现出发展不平衡的态势,简单案件在委托调解的案件中占绝大多数。有关委托调解既有的三种学说对其定性都存在不足。只有区别对待法院调解与诉讼调解,进而将立案前委托调解定性为诉讼调解,方可确保法院对委托调解的主导作用,并保障委托调解司法化进展的顺利进行。立案后委托调解的适用比例在一定程度上受制于人民调解委员会的受案范围。组织作为委托调解人时所具有的本能性扩权或固权冲动,将成为独立型委托调解存续和与附设型委托调解形成实质性竞争关系的重要原因。分流案源不是委托调解的唯一功能,其功能是多方面的、系统性的。

Court-entrusted mediation is presided by certain organizations and individuals who are authorized to mediate civil eases by the court before or after register. Up to now, court-entrusted mediation is still based on judicial interpretation and is short of legislative identification. The practice of court-entrusted mediation develops unbalancedly in different districts and courts. Easy cases prevail over the cases which are mediated by court-entrusted mediator. Three existing theories all have shortages. Distinguishing court mediation and litigation mediation and considering court-entrusted mediation before register as litigation mediation in nature can ensure the court to dominate the practice of court-entrusted mediation and judieialization of court- entrusted mediation to run smoothly. The proportion of applying court-entrusted mediation after register is enslaved to the scope of accepting cases of people＇s mediation commission to some extent. When the organizations play the role of courtentrusted mediator, the instinctive impulse to expand or defend power they equip with will become the strong basis for the existence of unattached court-entrusted mediation and the formation of the substantially competitive relationship with subordinate court-entrusted mediation. Dredging cases is not the only function of entrusted-mediation. The functions of entrusted-mediation have systematicity.