论二审参加之审理模式与路径重构

Reconstruction of the Trial Mode and Path for Third Party Participating in the Second Instance

司法解释允许第三人在二审中申请参加,但调解不成将全案发回重审,以此保障第三人的审级利益并强行合并裁判,却不能兼顾程序效率与安定。其原因在于我国实务试图折衷苏俄与大陆法系模式但忽略了其关键设计:苏俄民事诉讼虽然奉行第三人参加后本诉必须重新审理的原则,但禁止一审判决做出后的参加申请;大陆法系普遍允许诉讼终结前申请参加,但奉行本诉继续审理的原则。现行立法未限制二审参加,我国应当放弃重新审理模式,采纳本诉继续的原则。参加之诉应当由一审法院专属管辖或者由二审法院移送管辖,二审原则上应中止本诉等待参加之诉确定,或者在参加之诉也到达二审时合并审理。无独立请求权第三人一般受到被参加一方当事人诉讼状态包括二审失权的限制,但如果同时受到既判力、执行力或形成力的扩张作用,二审中仍可以实施与被参加一方当事人不同的诉讼行为。后诉中无独立请求权第三人可以基于其诉讼实施的缺陷排除参加或预决效力,恢复主张及证明责任分配的一般原则。

Judicial Interpretations of Supreme People’s Court permit third party to participate in the second instance,however,in order to ensure the right of judicial instance and unity of judicial decision,when the court mediation fails,all cases are meant to be remitted for retrial,these Judicial Interpretations have severely neglected the efficiency and stability of the procedure.The Court tried to compromise the model of Soviet law and the civil law,but misunderstood their key designs:Under the Soviet Union’s civil procedure law,although the cases should be retried after participation of a third party,participation will be denied after the first instance.Civil law system generally permit participation until the end of the procedure,but the trial will be continued without a remit.Current legislation does not deny participation in the second instance,China should abandon the remit and retrial mode,and adopt the trial-continuation mode.Independent Intervention Litigation shall be tried under the exclusive jurisdiction of the first instance court or transferred to it by the second instance.Main claim litigation at the second instance could be suspended until the Intervention Litigation has been determined,or combined with the Intervention Litigation when it finally arrived at the second instance.A third party with no independent claim will generally be restricted by the litigation status of the party assisted.When the third party is subject to the expansion of Rechtskraft,Vollstreckbarkeit,or Gestaltungswirkung,however,he/she can still carry out different litigation acts against the assisted party’s will.This third party in the subsequent litigation may,based on the defects of litigation implementation,apply for exclusion of participation effect or pre-judgment effect,and restore the general burden distribution of claim and proof.