论美国民事起诉标准的最优路径选择  

The Best Choice of Civil Pleading Standard in America

作　　者：张海燕[1] 

机构地区：[1]山东大学法学院,山东济南250100

出　　处：《法学杂志》2014年第7期71-78,共8页Law Science Magazine

基　　金：国家社科基金项目"实体法和程序法双重视角下的民事推定制度研究"(12BFX071);教育部人文社科基金项目"民事诉讼案件事实认定机制研究"(10YJC820151)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：美国联邦最高法院做出的2007年Twombly案和2009年Iqbal案判决意见引发了各界对民事起诉标准的激烈争论,焦点在于彰显自由主义精神的通知起诉标准和体现司法管理理念的合理起诉标准之间的路径博弈。通知起诉标准会引发机会主义原告成本套利的风险,而合理起诉标准则会产生原告有价值起诉被错误驳回的风险。因此,单一的民事起诉标准已无法消解前述两种风险,应选择二元化的民事起诉标准体系,并辅之以原告缴纳保证金为前提的选择退出机制。该最优路径的选择对我国民事起诉制度的完善具有启示。In America, verdicts of the case of Twombly in 2007 and Iqbal in 2009 made by Federal Supreme Court arose hot debates about the question of civil pleading standard, and their focus is the game between the notice pleading standard embodied liberalism and the plausibility pleading standard characterized with judicial management. The notice pleading standard will arise the risk of opportunistic plaintiffs＇ cost arbitrage, and the plausibility pleading standard will arise the risk of wrongful dismissals of plaintiffs＇ value files. Therefore, the unitary civil pleading standard has already not clear up the two above risks and the dual pleading standards system should be adopted and be supplemented by plaintiffs＇ opt- out system after affording the bond. The best choice of civil pleading standard in America has important significance for the perfection of civil pleading system in China.

关 键 词：民事起诉标准 通知起诉标准 合理起诉标准 选择退出机制 

分 类 号：D971.2[政治法律—法学] DD915.2