既判力相对性法源地位之证成  

Justification of the Relativistic Status of Legal Source of Res Judicata

作　　者：金印 Jin Yin

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学法学院

出　　处：《法学》2022年第10期144-159,共16页Law Science

基　　金：国家社科基金青年项目“民事实体法与程序法相互作用研究”(19CFX058)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：既判力相对性是指判决结果只约束当事人。制定法的明文规定并非既判力相对性的原始法源。《德国民事诉讼法》和《日本民事诉讼法》的明文规定并未创立既判力相对性,亦未改既判力绝对性为相对性,甚至不在于确认既判力相对性,而是在于整合或明确有关既判力扩张的规则。既判力扩张不同于既判力绝对性。前者仍以相对性为基础,仅扩张既判力至特定的人,后者则将判决结果约束所有的人。矛盾判决符合民事诉讼的本质属性,既不制造矛盾的实体和程序法律关系,也不导致矛盾的强制执行,并不构成对既判力相对性的否定。既判力相对性是民事诉讼法的逻辑起点,是程序保障原则的最低要求,是实体权利程序保护的最优选项。《民事诉讼法》存在肯定既判力相对性的规范,不存在否定既判力相对性的规范。既判力相对性作为民事诉讼法的组成部分,是约束审判机关的法源。The relativity of res judicata means that the judgment only binds the parties. Statutory law is not the original source of law for it. The statutes of Germany and Japan did not create the relativity of res judicata, nor did they change the absoluteness of res judicata into a relative one, nor even to confirm the relativity of res judicata, but to integrate or clarify the rules concerning the expansion of res judicata. The expansion of res judicata is different from the absoluteness of res judicata. The former is still based on the relativity of res judicata and only extends the binding effect to specific persons, while the latter extends the binding effect to every one. Contradictory judgments conform to the nature of civil procedure, and do not create contradictory substantive and procedural legal relationships, nor lead to contradictory enforcement. The relativity of res judicata is the starting point of civil procedure law, the minimum standard of due process, and the best option for procedural protection of substantive rights of a third person. In the Civil Procedure Law, there are norms that affirm the relativity of res judicata and there is no norm that denies it. The relativity of res judicata is an integral part of the Civil Procedure Law, and it is the source of law that binds the judicial organs.

关 键 词：既判力相对性 矛盾判决 程序保障原则 《民事诉讼法》的解释 

分 类 号：D925.1[政治法律—诉讼法学]