案外第三人权益程序保障体系研究

The Systematic Protection of the Third- party in Civil Procedure

我国民事诉讼法为案外第三人维护自身合法权益设置了执行异议、执行异议之诉、撤销之诉和申请再审四种救济途径。由于四种途径在适用范围上存在模糊和矛盾,因此引发了权益保护方式或路径的选择困境。为了避免选择困境,实现救济资源的有效利用,应当对上述方法予以优化配置。执行异议应定位为程序性审查,终局性中止或撤销相关执行行为有赖于执行异议之诉和第三人撤销之诉。基于再审制度的兜底性质,撤销之诉应当被优先适用。如果案外第三人在执行过程中可以通过相关程序主张权利,原则上在执行结束后排除撤销之诉和审判监督程序适用。从立法论视角出发,撤销之诉在我国的确立是针对虚假诉讼的应激举措,只有在民事诉讼立法和实践中确立既判力制度,才能根本保障案外第三人合法权益。

In order to protect its legal interest, four special legal institutions were offered for the third party out of the lawsuit in Chinese civil procedure, namely reminder serving as a legal remedy, the third party proceedings involving the prevention of execution of a judgment, revocation proceeding and reopening of proceedings. The boundary among the four special legal institutions is unclear. It has a very negative influence on the effect of the system of legal institutions for the third party, which focuses on the demarcation of the boundary among the four legal institutions ： the reminder serving as a legal remedy should be restricted on the nature and manner of compulsory enforcement. There is no real competition be tween the reminder serving as a legal remedy and the third party proceedings involving the prevention of the execution of a judgment. In comparison with the reopening of proceedings, the revocation proceeding should be first used. During the exe cution of a judgment, the last two legal institutions should be excluded.