论实现担保物权程序中对申请和异议的审查

On the examination of application and objection in the procedure of realizing security interest

对申请和异议进行审查并据此判断是否存在实质性争议是实现担保物权程序的关键。就此,司法实践中存在显著分歧,严重影响该程序的稳定适用和效果发挥。形式审查说和实质审查说看似针锋相对,实则都认为在该程序中无法适度审查申请和异议、难以有效识别实质性争议是否存在。这两种观点应予反对。基于该程序有别于普通程序的功能定位和特殊结构,应当从要素的完备性、主张的对抗性、初步证据的支撑等方面对申请和异议进行审查。进而判断两者是否结合起来形成实质性争议,也即在该特别程序中难以判明是非的实体权利义务争议。最终根据是否存在实质性争议决定程序的结果。如果法官对这种特别程序中的审查工作理解准确、运用得当,立法者“既维护公平、又促进效率”的程序功能预设完全可以实现。

It is the key to realize the procedure of security interest to review the application and objection and judge whether there is substantive dispute.In this regard,there are significant differences in judicial practice,which seriously affects the stable application and effect of the procedure.The theory of formal examination and the theory of substantive examination seem to be tit for tat.In fact,both believe that the application and objection cannot be properly examined in this procedure,and it is difficult to effectively identify whether there is a substantive dispute.These two views should be opposed.Based on the functional orientation and special structure of the procedure different from the ordinary procedure,the application and objection should be examined from the aspects of the completeness of elements,the antagonism of claims,the support of preliminary evidence and so on.Then judge whether the two combine to form a substantive dispute,that is,the dispute of substantive rights and obligations that is difficult to determine right and wrong in the special procedure.The final decision shall be based on whether there is a substantive dispute.If the judges understand the review work in this special procedure accurately and apply it properly,the preset procedural function of legislators to"maintain fairness and promote efficiency"can be realized.