对撤诉与诉讼时效中断之关系的分析与建构

Analysis and construction of the relation between withdrawal of action and interruption of limitation of action

《民法总则》将我国普通诉讼时效期间从两年调整为三年,在诉讼时效中断事由上增加了申请仲裁以及和其具有同等效力的其他情形,但是《民法总则》对理论上始终处于争议阶段的"起诉后又撤诉,诉讼时效是否应该中断,或者如何中断的问题"并没有给出确切回应。目前,学理上有三种处理意见,分别是"绝对中断说""附条件中断说"以及"绝对不中断说",这三种观点各有利弊。通过逐一分析其理论成果,借鉴域外其他国家合理做法及结合我国实际情况,提出"宽限期"的尝试性做法,于期限设置、适用前提以及适用次数上做了进一步细化设计。

"General Principles of Civil Law" has adjusted the period of limitation of action in China from two years to three years,and added the application for arbitration and other cases that have the same effect on the limitation of limitation of action.However,the General Principles of Civil Law does not give a definite response to the question of whether or how the limitation of action should be interrupted after the prosecution is withdrawn,which is always in the controversial stage in theory.At present,there are three ways of dealing with academic arguments:"absolute interruption","conditional interruption" and "absolutely no interruption".The three points of view have their advantages and disadvantages.This paper analyzes the above three theoretical achievements one by one,and draws lessons from other countries' reasonable practices,combined with the actual situation of China,and try to put forward the practice of "grace period" and make further detailed design in terms of time limit,application premise and application times.