“电梯劝阻吸烟案”二审中民事程序法难题及其破解

The Civil Procedure Law Problem and Its Solution in the Second Trial of the case of“Dissuading Smoking in the Elevator”

“电梯劝阻吸烟案”二审认定一审适用法律错误,撤销原判,驳回上诉人全部诉讼请求,引发学界广泛探讨。主要争议在:一、本案二审的审判是否超越民事案件应有的审理范围;二、二审裁判是否应受到“禁止不利益变更原则”限制;三、二审裁判认定本案涉及“损害社会公共利益”是否适当。本案中,法院变更一审法律适用属职权范围之内,未超越审理范围。根据民事上诉权及处分权理论,“禁止不利益变更原则”已蕴含其中,具体个案中应予适用。二审法院忽视原审被告之自由处分,减损上诉方已由一审法院支持之利益,违背该原则。且对于“公共利益”的认定亦过于宽泛,本案不应适用例外情形,而以“驳回上诉,维持原判”为最佳。

The second judgement of the“dissuasion of smoking in the elevator”case found that the court of first instance applied the wrong law,revoked the original judgment,rejected all the claims,and triggered the extensive discussion of the procedural law of the case.The main controversy:Firstly,whether the second instance of the case goes beyond the scope of the second-instance trial;Secondly,whether the second-instance judgment should be subject to the“prohibition of non-interest change principle”;Thirdly,whether the second-instance found the case is“damage to the public”is right.In this case,the court changed the application of the first-instance law within the scope of the powers of the jurisdiction,and did not exceed the scope of the second-instance trial.According to Chinese civil appeal rights and disposition rights theory,the“prohibition of non-interest change principle”has been included,and should be applied in specific cases.The court of second instance ignored the disciplinary action of the defendant in the original trial and derogated from the interest that the appellant has already supported by the court of first instance,violating this principle.And the recognition of"public interest"is too broad,the exception should not be applied in this case,and it is best to"reject the appeal and maintain the original judgment".