民国时期的变更判例制度及其实践  

The Legal Precedent Revise System and its Practice in the Period of the Republic of China

作　　者：何思萌 He Simeng

机构地区：[1]清华大学法学院

出　　处：《交大法学》2023年第4期133-147,共15页SJTU Law Review

基　　金：清华大学自主科研计划“中国司法制度的传承与创新”(项目编号:2022THZWJC18)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：为求促法律适用之统一,民国时期制定有“变更判例”之制度。如民国北京政府颁布的《法院编制法》,南京国民政府司法院颁布的《统一解释法令及变更判例规则》等文件,规定若案件裁判与先例有异,可以召开变更判例会议。常见的变更判例理由包括旧例与立法旨意不符、留存旧例将造成适用混乱等,但鲜见有变更之实践。囿于变更判例程序严格,当时的最高司法机关常“以立替改”,通过创设新的判决例或解释例、废止旧例等方式,虽未对判例进行变更,然在实质上起到了变更判例之效果。“北平临时政府”时期的司法委员会曾尝试变更判例,但是覆盖面小、持续时间短,缺乏必要的正当性和拘束力,所变更之判例未能得到承认。民国时期的变更判例之实践在正当性、拘束力和溯及力上,缺乏明确的定义。In order to promote the unification of the application of laws,there have been practices to update existing precedents during the period of the Republic of China,for instance,the enactment of the Organic Law of Court by the Beijing Government and the promulgation of the“Rules of Unified Legal Interpretation and Revised Precedent”by the Judicial Yuan(Court of Justice)of the Nanjing National Government,both of which provide that if the judgment of a case is different from the precedent,a meeting may be held to revise the precedent.Reasons for revising precedents could be inconsistency between the existing precedents and the legislative intention,or confusion in applying the existing law,while in reality there was little such practice.Since the procedures for revising precedents are strict,the Supreme Court often made a new precedent instead of revising the old one.The Judicial Yuan has adopted a variety of methods to unify the application of the law,such as making new judgments or interpretations,abolishing expired precedents etc.Therefore,it seems that the precedent has not been revised,but in fact,it has been revised.The Judicial Committee of“the Peking Provisional Government”tried to revise the precedent but failed to be recognized for its lack of necessary legitimacy and binding force.According to the practice in the period of the Republic of China,the Precedent Revise System lacks a clear definition of its necessary legitimacy,binding force and retroactive effect.

关 键 词：判决例 变更判例 解释例 统一法律适用 

分 类 号：D929[政治法律—法学] K258[历史地理—历史学]