应诉管辖规则的中国生成史  

The Generating History of Pleading Jurisdiction Rule in China

作　　者：张艳[1] 

机构地区：[1]吉林大学法学院,吉林长春130012

出　　处：《国家检察官学院学报》2017年第2期151-158,共8页Journal of National Prosecutors College

摘　　要：应诉管辖规则属于国际通行规则,但我国真正接纳它已是2012年的事情,1991年《民事诉讼法》规定涉外程序的应诉管辖其实是改革开放背景下法律需要与国际接轨的结果。基于有错必纠的传统观念、对处分原则的过度限制、起诉制度的限制等原因,我们长期未真正接受应诉管辖规则。随着当事人自我负责观念的强化、配合删除管辖错误再审事由的需求以及对有错必纠观念的重新审视,2012年民事诉讼法修正时,终于接纳了应诉管辖规则。应诉管辖规则进入民事诉讼法之后,设定法官告知义务的问题虽被理论界和实务界提出,但由于其并非应诉管辖规则的"标配",再加上我国现实原因,致使未能写入《民诉法解释》。《民诉法解释》第35条被视为移送管辖规则的组成部分,但其实应当在应诉管辖规则框架下理解,至于司法解释制定者所追求的规范目标可以考虑通过缺席判决与拟制自认的逻辑在应诉管辖规则内解决。Pleading jurisdiction rule is a common international rule accepted by China in 2012.The pleading jurisdiction in the 1991 Chinese Civil Procedure Law was applied only for procedures with foreign elements.For a long time,China could not accept the pleading jurisdiction rule due to the traditional concept of'righting every wrong',the over-restriction of'disposition principle'and the limitation of suit filing.With the strengthening of self-responsibility consciousness,the deletion of wrong jurisdiction as retrial reason,and the re-consideration of the'righting every wrong'concept,China finally accepted this rulein 2012.Although both academic and practitioner have put forward the disclosure duty of judge,it was not written into the Law and the Interpretation.Although Article 35 of the Interpretation of Civil Procedure Law is mostly considered as part of the removal jurisdiction rule,it should be comprehended under the framework of the pleading jurisdiction rule.As to the normative objective of this regulation,it can be achieved through default judgment and implied admission, which are within the logical circle of the pleading jurisdiction rule.

关 键 词：应诉管辖 管辖权异议 移送管辖 应诉答辩 告知义务 

分 类 号：D915.3[政治法律—诉讼法学]