法学论坛
法學論罈
법학론단
Legal Forum
2015年
2期
47~52
,共null页
先行调解 诉讼调解 诉调对接
先行調解 訴訟調解 訴調對接
선행조해 소송조해 소조대접
mediation first;lawsuit mediation;the mechanism of litigation and mediation connection
法学界对于新《民事诉讼法》第122条先行调解规定的理解及实施还存在较大争议。调解之“先行”必须与特定的时间节点相比较才有意义。从体系解释及术语使用规范的角度解读,先行调解是当事人将纠纷起诉至法院之后,在立案之前进行的调解。先行调解的适用条件“适宜调解”强调的是不能违法调解或不应在案情复杂、当事人对抗激烈之类的纠纷上徒劳消耗资源,是否“适宜调解”宜采取个案判断的方法。人民法院既可以通过立案庭或专门机构实施先行调解,也可以将纠纷委派人民调解组织、行政机构,在先行调解中实现三调联动。调解协议只具有普通民事合同的效力,但通过诉调对接,即当事人自愿选择立案签发调解书和启动司法确认程序两种方式,能够赋予调解协议强制执行力。
法學界對于新《民事訴訟法》第122條先行調解規定的理解及實施還存在較大爭議。調解之“先行”必鬚與特定的時間節點相比較纔有意義。從體繫解釋及術語使用規範的角度解讀,先行調解是噹事人將糾紛起訴至法院之後,在立案之前進行的調解。先行調解的適用條件“適宜調解”彊調的是不能違法調解或不應在案情複雜、噹事人對抗激烈之類的糾紛上徒勞消耗資源,是否“適宜調解”宜採取箇案判斷的方法。人民法院既可以通過立案庭或專門機構實施先行調解,也可以將糾紛委派人民調解組織、行政機構,在先行調解中實現三調聯動。調解協議隻具有普通民事閤同的效力,但通過訴調對接,即噹事人自願選擇立案籤髮調解書和啟動司法確認程序兩種方式,能夠賦予調解協議彊製執行力。
법학계대우신《민사소송법》제122조선행조해규정적리해급실시환존재교대쟁의。조해지“선행”필수여특정적시간절점상비교재유의의。종체계해석급술어사용규범적각도해독,선행조해시당사인장규분기소지법원지후,재입안지전진행적조해。선행조해적괄용조건“괄의조해”강조적시불능위법조해혹불응재안정복잡、당사인대항격렬지류적규분상도로소모자원,시부“괄의조해”의채취개안판단적방법。인민법원기가이통과입안정혹전문궤구실시선행조해,야가이장규분위파인민조해조직、행정궤구,재선행조해중실현삼조련동。조해협의지구유보통민사합동적효력,단통과소조대접,즉당사인자원선택입안첨발조해서화계동사법학인정서량충방식,능구부여조해협의강제집행력。
There is much controversial in the jurisprudential circle about the rule of mediation first in Article 122 of the new Civil Procedure Law. The word "first" can show its meaning by compared with a specific time. From the perspective of system inter- pretation and the using rule of the terms, mediation first is such kind of mediation which is carried on after the parties file the lawsuit and before the case is registered. The applicable condition "suitable for mediation" stresses to prohibit illegal mediation or the consumption of mediation resources in vain. We can make the judgment in every single case. The people~ courts can im- plement the mediation first either by the case acceptance tribunals, the specialized agencies and the delegated organization, administrative agencies. The conciliation agreement has the effectiveness just the same as the common civil contract, but the parties can voluntarily entrust the mediation agreement with enforceable effectiveness by making a mediation record or initiating a judicial confirmation process.