民事公益诉讼预决效力的展开与重塑

The Expansion and Reconstruction of the Predetermined Effect of Civil Public Interest Litigation Judgment

最高人民法院《关于审理环境民事公益诉讼案件适用法律若干问题的解释》第30条和最高人民法院《关于审理消费民事公益诉讼案件适用法律若干问题的解释》第16条将证明效和争点效作为民事公益诉讼已决事实对后续私益诉讼发挥预决效力的理论基础,然而这种混合模式在理论上难以自圆其说,在实践中也增加了法院的适用难度。鉴于公益私益衔接案件在程序保障方面的特殊要求,其预决效力不宜沿袭民事私益诉讼之间的免证效立场,而争点效理论中的“程序保障观念”可成为重塑民事公益诉讼预决效力的重要指针。在主观范围上,仅后一私益诉讼原告可对被告主张于已有利的公益诉讼已决事实,且其作为前诉案外人不受前诉预决效力约束;在客观范围上,预决事实应在主要事实(侵权行为、损害结果、主观过错、因果关系、减免责事由)的范围内展开。在作用条件上,要求当事人对预决事实已为充分攻防以及法院对预决事实已作出实质性判断;在作用效果上,承认民事公益诉讼预决事实对后续私益诉讼的遮断效果,但当事人提出新诉讼资料足以推翻原判断的除外。

Article 30 of the Interpretation of Environmental Civil Public Interest Litigation and Article 16 of the Interpretation of Consumer Civil Public Interest Litigation use proof effect and indisputable point effect as the theoretical basis for the predetermined effect of civil public interest litigation judgment.However,this mixed model is difficult to reconcile in theory and increases the difficulty of judicial practice.Given the special requirements for procedural protection in such cases,the predetermined effect should not follow the position of proof effect between civil private interest litigation,the concept of"procedural protection"in the theory of indisputable point effect can become an important indicator for reshaping the predetermined effect of civil public interest litigation judgment.In terms of subject scope,only the plaintiff in the later lawsuit can assert against the defendant the fact that the public interest litigation has been resolved in their favor,and as an outsider in the previous lawsuit,they are not bound by the effectiveness of the preliminary judgment in the previous lawsuit.In terms of the scope of the object,the prejudgment facts are limited to the main facts,such as infringement,damage results,subjective fault,causal relationship,and reasons for reducing liability.In terms of conditions,it is required that the parties have fully attacked and defended the prejudgment facts,and the court has made substantive judgments on the prejudgment facts.In terms of effectiveness,it is recognized that the prejudgment facts of civil public interest litigation have a blocking effect on subsequent private interest litigation,except when the parties propose new litigation materials that are sufficient to overturn the original judgment.