作者：任重
作者介绍：清华大学法学院副教授，博士生导师
出版日期：2018年12月9日
内容提要 释明边界是我国民事诉讼法学研究尚未彻底解决,但司法实践迫切需要明确的问题。我国释明边界存在三种样态(应释明、不应释明和可释明),在划定释明边界时应坚持两个步骤和五个方面。当不存在当事人最低限度的暗示时,对诉讼请求的释明原则上应限于《证据规定》第35条第1款和《民间借贷规定》第24条第1款,以及以《精神损害赔偿解释》第6条为代表的失权情形;案件事实释明应限于基础规范和反对规范所能涵盖的范畴;在具体证据提出方面,最高人民法院的裁判文书限于鉴定申请,且定位为可释明事项。法官依职权审查的诉讼规范及其事实不受上述限制,但应避免突袭裁判。释明边界真正落到实处,还有赖于保障机制的多元化。以释明请求权、异议、回避、上诉和再审对应释明和不应释明事项进行再分层,可以在保障当事人程序和实体权利的基础上,避免法院负担过重,并最终在我国建立起刚柔并济的释明边界。
关键词 释明 处分原则 辩论原则 法官中立
Abstract: The boundary of interpretation is a question which is urgent to be clarified in our judicial practice, but the study of civil procedural law in our country has not completely solved it yet. There are three kinds of interpretation boundary in China ( should be interpreted, should not be interpreted and can be interpreted). Two steps and five aspects should be adhered to when delimiting the boundaries of interpretation. When there is no minimum hint from the parties concerned, the interpretation of the claim shall be limited to paragraph 1 of article 35 of the Provisions of Evidence, paragraph 1 of article 24, of the Provisions on Private Lending, and the loss of right represented by article 6 of the Interpretation of Compensation for Mental Damage in principle; The interpretation of case facts should be limited to the document facts that can be covered by basic norms and opposing norm; As regards the presentation of specific evidence, judgment documents of the Supreme People's Court are limited to applications for appraisal and are defined as explanatory matters. The rules of procedure and the facts of a judge's review in accordance with his or her powers are not subject to the above restrictions, but the surprise of judgment should be avoided. The implementation of the boundary of interpretation depends on the diversified guarantee mechanism. Re stratification of the matters that should and should not be interpreted, by interpreting the right of claim, objection, withdrawal, appeal and retrial, can avoid overburdening the court on the basis of protecting the procedural and substantive rights of the parties, and eventually establish a couple hardness with softness interpretation boundary in China.