摘要
规制恶意调解是本次民事诉讼法修改的重要议题之一。恶意调解包含一方恶意调解与双方恶意调解。调解不仅适用诉讼法的规定,也应受到民法法律行为规范的调整。调解书的效力有别于判决的既判力;判决再审的某些规定无法直接套用于调解书的再审。根据不同的瑕疵原因,可以赋予一方恶意调解的受害人的若干救济途径,而不宜仅限于再审。在双方恶意调解的情形,首先需要考量调解书对第三人是否发生效力以及发生何种效力,继而以调解所涉及的实体法律关系为基准分别确定案外人的救济手段。
＂Vergleichsbetrug＂ in litigation is growing swiftly in China, is one of the main topics in the amend- ment of civil procedure law. ＂Vergleichsbetrug＂ in litigation comprises malicious settlement by one party and mali- cious settlement by both sides. Settlement in litigation, is not only applied with procedure law, but also is regulated by civil law. According to different defects in effect, the injured party should be entitled with several remedies, and the remedies shouldn＇ t be limited to rehearing. In the case of ＂Vergleichsbetrug＂ the effects upon the parties should be ascertained, so may measures against, ＂Vergleichsbetrug＂ successively be determined.
出处
《重庆大学学报（社会科学版）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2014年第5期109-115,共7页
Journal of Chongqing University(Social Science Edition)
基金
教育部人文重点研究基地重大项目"诉讼真实与民事诉讼立法建构"(2007JJD810172)
关键词
恶意调解
诉讼上和解
两性说
既判力否定说
再审
vergleichsbetrug
prozessvergleich
lehre vom doppelnatur
keine materielle rechtskraft
rehearing
