第二审程序的反诉:制度建构与理念变迁——兼评《民诉法解释》第328条  

The Institution Establishment and Concept Change of Counterclaim in the Procedure of Second Instance: Comments on Article 328 in the Interpretation about Civil Procedure Law

作　　者：唐玉富[1] 

机构地区：[1]浙江工商大学法学院,杭州310018

出　　处：《现代法学》2016年第5期130-140,共11页Modern Law Science

基　　金：2014年浙江省哲学社会科学规划课题"民事诉讼结构的嬗变与诉讼合作主义的生成"(14NDJC136YB);2015年杭州市哲学社会科学规划课题"环境公益诉讼权利生成效能的实现路径与程序安排研究"(Z15JC124);2016年浙江工商大学法学基地课题"环境公益诉讼权利生成效能的实现路径与程序安排研究"(2016B008)

摘　　要：第二审程序的反诉为相对独立之诉,程序选择权与纠纷解决一次性两种理论为其提供了坚实的正当性基础。《民诉法解释》第328条是第二审程序的反诉在我国的客观实在法依托。然而,该条所做的程序安排交织存在着利益失衡、程序断裂与规范错位三大重要问题,严重抑制了第二审程序的反诉的理论认同与实践利用。在建构有序化与弹性化的第二审程序的反诉的过程中,合理的思路是适度糅合当事人合意机制与法院阐明权以实现二者之间的共同生长。这样,合作理念将适当注入现代民事诉讼之中,进而将深刻改变民事诉讼格局及其未来发展路向。Counterclaim in the procedure of second instance is a relatively independent action. The theo- ries of option fight and one-time dispute resolution provide a solid legitimate basis for it. Judges consider the Article 328 as objective law to resolve the counterclaim in the procedure of second instance. However, imbalance of interests, fracture of procedure of second instance procedure and misunderstanding of regula and severely inhibit the recognition of the tion co-exist on the counterclaim in the theory and practical use. When orderly establishing and elasticizing counterclaim procedure, a reasonable path is the utilization of consensual mecha- nism of litigants and judicial power of interpretation. Thus, the idea of cooperation will be introduced into modem civil litigation and will profoundly change the construction of civil litigation and its future directions.

关 键 词：第二审程序的反诉 程序选择权 纠纷解决一次性 当事人合意 法院阐明权 

分 类 号：D925.1[政治法律—诉讼法学]