诉讼契约之研究

Litigation Agreement

诉讼契约系诉讼行为之一种，在民事诉讼法中，有部分系为法所明文承认之类型；但对於非为法所明定之诉讼契约是否亦应承认其合法性之问题，在民事诉讼法之学理及实务发展上，甚具争议性。此一问题之存在，并非仅在我国民事诉讼法发生，实则，其在民事诉讼法学有高度发展之国家，亦有类似之经验。 在我国，就诉讼契约之研究，除部分教科书约略提及其重点之外，学者有直接对於部分具体诉讼契约类型进行研究者，例如仲裁监定契约、仲裁契约、证据契约、国际管辖权之合意及示范诉讼契约等；另亦有自程序选择权论出发，而赋予诉讼契约之另一观察角度者。学者之前开研究，对於诉讼契约制度之发展，具有重大影响，应值重视。 虽如此，本文认为对於此一议题之基本论，在我国似尚未有进行完整之系统分析者，就此似仍有补充之实益。爲此，本文拟藉助德国学理及实务之发展经验，对於诉讼契约相关问题加以探讨，其中着重在对诉讼契约之本质论、种类、合法性及效力之评估，并试图对於其合法性之界限为较具体之说明。此外，对於国内目前新近实务发展，尤其对於争点协议所导致之理论争议，加以评估，期能提供国内对於此一问题之研究素材。

The recent amendments of Civil Procedure Law extensively adopt the concept of agreement in litigation, such as agreement of simplifying the contestation, agreement of non-disclosure of court hearing, and so on. Although some of our scholars attempt to define the foregoing agreements among litigants on the theory of optional rights on civil procedure, essentially, such agreements should be within the concept of the agreement in litigation. Since current research on the theoretical basis of the mechanism of agreement in litigation in our country is insufficient, such mechanism could not be fully understood nor can it be functioned well. Thus, further study on this topic is needed in order to fulfill the real purpose of amending Civil Procedure Law and clarify the legality of the agreement in litigation that was not provided in the Law in the past as well.