变更判决之诉的立法论——兼论定期金给付制度的适用

Legislation on the litigation of Change Judgement: Concurrently Discussing the Application of Periodical Payment System

定期金给付判决是根据判决基准时判定的事实对未来预测而作出的给付判决,因而该判决可能与将来实际情势产生重大差异。对此,我国相关司法解释规定可以"相应调整"和"作为新案受理",但在制度设计上忽视了前诉与后诉之间的牵连关系,致使出现系列理论和实践难题。相应,德国、日本等国家和地区民事诉讼法中确立了变更判决之诉这一特殊诉讼程序,来对原定期金给付判决进行修正,解除其部分或全部既判力,给予权利人以提出新主张的救济机会,追求实质公平。在此,可以借鉴域外相关立法,在既判力理论视角下构建我国变更判决之诉,为在情势变更情形下调整定期金给付金额提供程序保障,以实现定期金给付制度的功能。

The periodical payment judgment is a judgment of payment for the future prediction based on the facts judged on the basis of the judgment, so major differences may appeared between the judgment and the actual situation in the future. In this regard, China’s relevant judicial interpretation prescription can be "adjusted accordingly" and "accepted as a new case",but it ignores the relationship between the pre-appeal and post-appeal resulting in a series of theoretical and practical problems. Correspondingly, the special procedural of the litigation of change judgement has been established in the Civil Procedure Law of Germany, Japan and other countries and regions to correct the original judgment of periodical payment, to release part or all of its res judicata, and to give relief opportunities to oblige for proposing new claims so as to pursue the substantive fairness. Here, we can draw lessons from extraterritorial related legislation to construct our country’s litigation of change judgment from the perspective of res judicata theory, which provides procedural safeguards to adjust the amount of Periodical payment in case of circumstances change in order to realize the function of Periodical payment system.