缺席当事人提起撤销诉讼主体适格论  

Subject Eligibility of Absent Parties for Commencement of Revocatory Litigation

作　　者：马登科[1] 黄馨路 MA Deng-ke;HUANG Xin-lu

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学法学院,重庆401120

出　　处：《三峡大学学报(人文社会科学版)》2025年第2期65-72,116,共9页Journal of China Three Gorges University(Humanities & Social Sciences)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“国家治理体系中民事执行现代化研究”(20&ZD195)。

摘　　要：当前上诉和再审救济对缺席当事人保护不周延,撤销诉讼虽可为缺席当事人提供充分救济但面临主体适格的质疑。为此,可调整撤销诉讼的立法定位与制度逻辑,使之摆脱第三人参加诉讼制度和遏制虚假诉讼逻辑的限制,回归非常规救济程序的定位与案外人程序保障的功能,充分发挥制度生命力和张力。以此为基础,厘清撤销诉讼的适格主体范围,对《民事诉讼法》第59条第3款进行文义解释、法意解释和目的解释,可肯定缺席当事人提起撤销诉讼的适格主体地位。同时,从明确适用的条件和滥用的惩治两方面对缺席当事人提起撤销诉讼进行限制,以兼顾程序保障与程序安定。The current appellate and retrial relief systems suffer from deficiencies,providing inadequate or incomplete protection for absent parties.Despite the availability of lawsuit withdrawal as a means of relief,absent parties still face challenges regarding the qualification of the plaintiff.To address this,adjustments can be made to the legislative orientation and institutional logic of lawsuit withdrawal,removing the constraints imposed by the system of third-party participation in litigation and the logic of fraudulent litigation prevention.These adjustments can enable unconventional relief procedures to fulfill their role and provide procedural safeguards for non-parties,fully demonstrating the validity and adaptability of the system.On this basis,the scope of eligible plaintiffs in the context of lawsuit withdrawal should be clarified by interpreting Article 59,Paragraph 3 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China through literal and purposive interpretations as well as legislative intent analysis,thereby affirming the eligibility of absent parties to initiate lawsuit withdrawal.Meanwhile,restrictions should be imposed on absent parties initiating lawsuit withdrawal in terms of clarifying applicable conditions and imposing penalties for abuse,to achieve both procedural safeguards and procedural stability.

关 键 词：撤销诉讼 缺席判决 程序救济 虚假诉讼 法律解释 

分 类 号：D925.1[政治法律—诉讼法学]