论争点效之比较法源流与本土归化  

The Logical Origin on Comparative Law and Localization of Issue Preclusion

作　　者：丁宝同[1] 

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学法学院

出　　处：《比较法研究》2016年第3期75-91,共17页Journal of Comparative Law

基　　金：国家社科基金项目"民事公益侵害阻断程序研究"(13CFX065);西南政法大学校级重点科研项目"民事诉讼公益侵害阻断程序研究"(2012-XZZD21)的研究成果

摘　　要：对民事判决效力的谱系化认知,既须以"判决的确定"为界限区分未确定判决与确定判决的效力,还须区分确定判决之主文与判决理由的效力。"预决效力"和"先决效力"之制度构想的提出,意在寻求"争点效"理论的本土归化。其间有本源联系,即三者均指判决理由中之判断事项的程序法效力,均源于既判力客观范围之传统制度方案的内在缺陷,且在程序法理基础和制度功能取向上存在共性。也有本质区别,即争点效强调判决理由中之判断结论的刚性确定力,并不区分争点的性质;而预决效力和先决效力则突出判决理由判断之效力的柔韧性和程序性,且要区分争点的性质。To analyse the effect of civil judgment systematically,we should not only distinct determined civil judgment from un-determined civil judgment,but also differentiate between text and justification in a determined civil judgment. In the justification of a determined civil judgment,the fact judgment possess preliminary effect and the legal judgment possess pre-determination effect. Compared with issue preclusion,there are essential relationship and distinction. They are all procedural effect of the justification in a determined civil judgment,which is the essential relationship. Issue preclusion does not distinguish between fact issue and legal issue,but preliminary effect and pre-determination effect must distinguish between fact issue and legal issue,the essential distinction.

关 键 词：既判力 判决理由 争点效 预决效力 先决效力 

分 类 号：D925.1[政治法律—诉讼法学]