摘要
《最高人民法院关于审理建设工程施工合同司法解释》第二十六条为解决农民工讨薪难问题创设了实际施工人制度。司法解释运行至今,出现了实际施工人范围认定不清、举证责任困难、仲裁条款不明等司法裁判问题。因此,学界对于实际施工人制度的存废之争一直不断,以《建设工程合同司法解释二征求意见稿》两种意见为典型。尽管许多学者主张将代位权诉讼适用于实际施工人制度,但是代位权诉讼本身存在理论与程序问题,并不适合实际施工人案件。目前,应当在保留实际施工人制度的同时,从界定实际施工人主体范围、落实诉权的性质以及明确举证责任的范围和内容等三个方面进行完善。
The 26th term of Supreme People＇ s Court＇ s explanation on the construction contract disputes creates the actual construction system in order to solve the problem of migrant workers unpaid hard. So far, there have been some judicial judgment problems, such as unclear determination of actual construction personnel, difficulty in presenting proof and unclear arbitration clauses. Therefore, the academic circle has been constantly arguing about the existence and validity of actual constructor system. Although many scholars argue that the action of subrogation right should be applied to actual constructor system, the action of subrogation right itself＇ has theoretical and procedural problems and is not suitable for actual constructor case. At present, it should be improved in three aspects while retaining actual constructor system. They includes defining the scope of the subject of the actual construction, clarifying the nature of the right of action and clarifying the scope and content of the burden of proof.
作者
唐思佳
TANG Si-jia(College of Humanities and Law,Changsha University of Science and Technology,Changsha 410076,China)
出处
《湖北第二师范学院学报》
2018年第10期76-80,共5页
Journal of Hubei University of Education
关键词
实际施工人
代位权
裁判困境
理论争议
完善思路
actual constructor
right of subrogation
referee dilemma
theoretical disagreement
improvement of thoughts
