论我国代表人诉讼制度正当性基础的应然选择——美国集团诉讼的历史考察与现代启示  

On Choice of Justification of Representative Litigation in China

作　　者：曹伟[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京师范大学,北京100875

出　　处：《法学杂志》2012年第1期98-102,共5页Law Science Magazine

摘　　要：意思自治与集体主义的冲突自始自终贯穿于集团诉讼历史发展的全过程。共同利益理论、同意理论以及实体理论则是学界为缓解这一冲突而提出的对策。实体理论既克服了共同利益理论在方法论假定上的缺陷,也可以克服同意理论在事实假定上的不足,是我国构建代表人诉讼制度正当性基础的最佳选择。The individual autonomy＇s conflict with collectivism has been throughout the development of U. S. class action. In order to de - escalate the conflict, the American legal scholarship offered Common Interest Theory, Consent Theory and Substantive Theory as solutions. Substantive Theory overcomes the Common Interest Theory＇s defect in methodology and the Consent Theory＇s defect in factual assumptions, and therefore is the best choice of justification of representative litigation in China.

关 键 词：集团诉讼 共同利益理论 同意理论 实体理论 

分 类 号：D971.2[政治法律—法学] D925.1