摘要
在民事判决发生效力后,当事人又通过后诉主张行使撤销权、解除权与抵销权等形成权,可能导致矛盾判决及前诉判决遮断形成权通过后诉行使的问题。由于我国采诉讼标的识别的"旧实体法说",前诉关于原权利的请求权纠纷与后诉的形成权纠纷并非同一诉讼标的,无法以重复诉讼规则作为驳回后诉的依据,因此需要以判决的遮断效力阻断后诉请求与事实主张。一般而言,判决遮断效力对阻断形成权的后诉行使具有统一性、普遍性的特点,行使形成权的自由性须让步于国家裁判的公权性。在此基础上,也要充分考虑例外情形,以实现实质正义。对形成权通过后诉行使所进行的综合考量,应平衡以下关系:生效判决遮断效力的绝对性与相对性;前诉纠纷解决的终局性与形成权通过后诉行使的必要性、程序保障、当事人的提出责任与实体法秩序的协调等等。基于综合判断,撤销权、解除权原则上应受前诉生效判决遮断,而抵销权原则上不应受前诉生效判决遮断。
After the civil judgment becomes effective,if the party claims to exercise right of formation through a latter action,including the right to revocation,the right to rescission and the right to setoff,it may lead to contradictory judgment and the issue of whether the exercise of right of formation in latter action ought to be blocked by the prior judgment.Because China adopts the traditional old substantive law theory to identify the object of action,the former litigation over the claim of original right and the subsequent litigation over the claim of formation right do not have the same subject matter,meaning that the repeated suit rule cannot be used as the basis for dismissing the latter litigation.Therefore,it is necessary to block claims and factual claims of subsequent litigation with the blocking effect of the preceding judgment.Generally speaking,the blocking effect would block the exercise of the right of formation through subsequent litigation uniformly and universally,as the freedom of exercising right of formation should give way to the public authority of national adjudication.On this basis,the exceptions should be fully considered in pursuit of substantial justice.With regard to the comprehensive consideration of exercising formation right through subsequent litigation,the following relationships should be balanced:the absoluteness and relativity of blocking effect;the dispute settlement finality of former litigation and the necessity of exercising formation right through subsequent litigation,procedural protection;parties’burden of claim and the coordination of substantive law order,etc.Based on comprehensive consideration,the right to revocation and the right to rescission should be blocked by the effective previous judgment in principle,while the right to setoff is the opposite.
出处
《中国法学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2021年第3期265-286,共22页
China Legal Science
基金
2019年度国家社科基金一般项目“重复诉讼识别中的利益衡量研究”(项目批准号:19BFX111)的阶段性成果。
作者简介
王福华,上海交通大学凯原法学院教授。
