摘要
原告若在诉讼中提出意欲改变诉状中列明的"诉讼请求和事实、理由",法官应予妥善应对。立法与司法解释相关规定未能给予法官有效指引;实务界的处置未尽一致;相关学术探讨受外国概念和理论羁绊。关于应宽待诉的变更、特定情形下不允许诉的变更的理论结论虽可堪接受,但解释力和说服力不足。对于诉讼具有决定性作用的是原告的诉讼目的。因此,以原告诉讼目的变动程度为依据重新进行类型化整理是认识和解决问题的较好方法。对于绝大多数变更申请应予同意,因为诉讼本应具备对原告诉讼目的变动的一定包容力。对于原告诉讼根本目的发生替换的变更申请则不应同意。决定是否同意变更申请的根本原因在于诉讼法上的价值选择而非出于诉讼经济或者平衡双方利益的考虑。案情陈述和原告诉讼目的是手段与目的的关系。案情陈述根本变化与原告诉讼根本目的替换是外在表征与内在根据的关系。既然变更申请并非一律会被允许,那么传统上认为的"法官可以泛泛允许变更申请"或者"法官可以先同意申请嗣后再了解申请的具体内容"的看法即不能成立。
It's quite common that plaintiffs intend to modify claims, facts or reasons in their corn plaints, while there is controversy in the judicial practice due to the weakness of legislation and academic research. The core issue of civil litigation is the plaintiffs' objective of sue, which calls for the categoriza- tion of modifications as a better approach. Such motions shall be allowed generally for the tolerance with- in the lawsuit, except when the plaintiffs' modification of objectives is substantial. It's the basic value option of civil procedure law that plays the decisive role in corresponding judicial response, rather than the balance between the interests of parties or the efficiency of litigation.
出处
《中外法学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2017年第5期1267-1294,共28页
Peking University Law Journal
基金
博士后国际交流计划资助
关键词
诉状
变更
申请
诉讼目的
案情陈述
Complaint
Modification
Motion
Objective of Sue
Statement of Facts