摘要
学界大多认为,"缺席判决主义"的本质是缺席就败诉。通过对两大法系一些国家缺席审判制度的深入考察,我们可以发现法官依然要对诉讼要件和证据资料进行审查。同时,在英美法系国家,法官同样须要经过审理才能作出缺席判决;一方当事人不履行审前命令的判决不属于缺席判决。因而,"缺席判决主义"的本质应当定性为单方审查。
For many scholars, the essence of ＂default judgment＂ simply means the defaulter＇ s losing the case. However, a close examination of the default judgment practiced in the two main legal systems reveals that judges will still check the procedural requirements for filing a petition and the evidence. In common law coun- tries, the judge typically makes a default judgment after a hearing while the judgment made for one party＇ s failing to obey the pretrial order fails out of the ambit of default judgment. As such, the essence of ＂default judgment＂ should be held as mono-check.
出处
《现代法学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2010年第5期150-157,共8页
Modern Law Science
基金
四川省教育厅项目"民事缺席审判制度研究"(08SA127)
关键词
缺席判决主义
民事诉讼
诉讼要件
证据资料
单方审查
default judgment doctrine
civil procedure
procedural requirements
evidence
mono-check
