【作者】 张婷；

【导师】 何勤华；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法大学 ， 法律史， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 没有对抗，就没有审判。法官与当事人的地位，是一切民事诉讼制度的中心问题。以英美审判制度为代表的民事对抗制，在司法审判中强调当事人对于程序的主导权，反对法官职权专断，突出体现了程序自由主义基本思想的精髓。民事程序是一个不断变化的领域，研究程序原理、价值和历史背景，有助于理解和把握这一动态的领域，及其发生变化的背后意义。现代各国的民事诉讼法改革，无论是吸收、借鉴，抑或是批判、改造，都无法离开对抗制诉讼模式这一基点。本文是在中国语境下对英美民事对抗制度的历史，进行的一次全面、系统考察的大胆尝试，试图透过思想家的理论，去观察今天的英美社会，及其民事审判权力的运作状况。本文的初衷是向人们展示一幅关于民事对抗制运转的全景图：在过去的半个多世纪以来，民事对抗制经历了一些什么变化，正在经历着什么样的变化。文章以美国案件管理运动为切入点，对于民事对抗制的起源、蓬勃发展时期、衰落时期进行了全景式的考察；并就审前程序的证据开示、庭审程序的交叉询问以及陪审制度等进行专题分析，阐述对抗式程序原理，以及受这些原理影响的背景和实践环境，详细描述了近来对抗制自身的修订情况；揭示了自由主义与民事对抗制之间存在的内在的规律性联系，对于民事对抗制未来发展趋势进行了展望，以及对于中国的民事司法改革的相关启示。本文所做的努力之一，是提供一个详尽记录着关于民事对抗制系统各个部分以及彼此之间关系的丰富资料的法学文献，力图做到相关信息最大化。除此之外，本文试图在变动不居的复杂现象中，找出一个相对稳定的事物本质。本文详细考察不列颠式的自由和美利坚式的自由，它所揭示了不同民族国家的思想界限所在，以及该国家该民族所属的精神状态。通过研究可以发现，民事对抗制的盛行和衰落，是由该国在特定的历史阶段中具体的经济、政治和社会状况因素的变化所决定的。民事对抗制和自由主义思想一脉相承，自由主义思想的每一次重大的变化，迟早会反映到司法审判制度中，成为下一阶段民事对抗制发展的风向标。未来虽然变幻莫测，但是民事诉讼程序的发展却沿着一条相对稳定的规律向前发展，那就是，在公正和效率之间的取舍，以及在自由和平等之间的平衡。本文共分为六章具体进行阐释。第一章为民事对抗制概述。首先主要介绍民事对抗制的概念、特征，以及职权制等相关概念；然后具体描述对抗制的起源、对抗制在英国的正式确立，以及其在美国发扬光大的发展历程；再次，对于民事对抗制这一法律制度进行了政治化解读，民事对抗制背后所体现的是程序自由主义精神，自由是对抗制的核心价值要素，从而揭示了程序法与自由之间，法与自由之间存在的深刻关系；最后，作者通过对于民事对抗制概念的界定、相对概念的比较、对抗制发展历史进程的研究，得出了关于对抗制研究的八点心得。第二章为二战后美国民事对抗制的演变之概览。由于本文是从美国的案件管理制度的角度具体展开研究的，因此这部分涉及到美国的内容是本文的重点之一。本文综合美国的政治、经济、文化、社会和法律发展各项要素，对于二战后美国民事对抗制的发展的两个阶段：1945～1960s的蓬勃发展期，以及1970s-2010s的衰落期，展开了全景式的叙述蓝图，提供了一个了解民事对抗制发展变化的整体观。由于可以将美国在1960s发展起来的案件管理运动，看作是一个对于传统对抗制的重大挑战，因此，民事对抗制的衰落与案件管理运动的兴起，两者之间密切相关。本文紧接着对美国案件管理运动发展历程进行了简介，围绕着美国律师协会的《关于减少法院迟延的标准》、联邦司法中心的《复杂诉讼指南》系列、美国司法会议的《民事诉讼管理手册》系列，以及美国国会的《联邦民事诉讼规则》和《民事司法改革法》共四项内容，介绍了美国案件管理运动的具体表现形式。第三章为二战后英国民事对抗制的演变之概览。由于英国是民事对抗制的诞生地，因此对英国的考察也是必不可少的。民事对抗制起源于英国，但后来却在美国达到登峰造极之势。现代以来，对于民事对抗制来说，英国的贡献价值不如美国。尽管如此，对于英国情况的研究，将有利于与美国情况进行对比，或遥相呼应、或各行其是，可令民事对抗制的研究多视角化。相对于第二章美国的内容而言，这部分介绍稍略，主要起到的是一个陪衬和便于比较的作用。第四章为二战后民事对抗制在审前程序中的变化。从第四章开始，本文展开对于民事对抗制的专项制度的具体考察。由于审前程序是现代民事程序的重心所在，而且是案件管理运动主要作用范围，因此该内容是本文的重点之一。这一部分综合法规变化、判例发展、学者评论、相应数据等要素，对于各项具体制度提供极为详尽的细节支撑。具体分为民事审前程序概述、驳回诉讼、审前会议、证据披露和证据开示、即决判决、替代性纠纷解决机制和诉讼和解、法院制裁，以及本章小结八个部分，其中涉及六项审前程序的专项制度。本章结论如下：尽管传统的放任自由的民事对抗制已经基本退出审前程序，英美审前程序已为案件管理所完全占领，但是审前程序并没有蜕变为法院全面接手当事人诉讼事务的职权主义模式，诉讼仍然是当事人自己的事，法院的职权限于程序控制方面，法官职权的强化起到的是监督和控制程序进程的作用。因此，如今英美的审前程序实行的是管理型司法模式，这种管理型的司法模式，在实质上是一种经过修正的现代民事对抗制。修正后的民事对抗制，承认和接受必要的司法干预，平衡了个案中当事人的权利保障与整体司法资源的有效利用之间的关系，兼顾了个人利益和公共利益，是一种在兼顾社会利益前提下的个人价值优先论。第五章为二战后民事对抗制在庭审程序中的变化。开庭审理程序是民事对抗式审判的最重要的程序之一，对抗制所包含的口头主义和辩论主义原则在庭审程序中都有集中体现。这部分内容，主要包括对庭审阶段英美两国的案件管理权的梳理和总结，选择了民事陪审团、交叉询问两项具体的庭审制度，进行专项考察。通过对于这两项最典型的民事对抗制的标志性制度，在二战后的所经历的一系列变化的考察，通过大量的法规变化、判例发展和相关数据，详细展现了民事对抗制在庭审程序中的变化过程，并对其进行评价和总结。本章的结论如下：庭审程序不再是民事诉讼程序的重心，随着进入到庭审程序案件数量的大幅减少，庭审程序的地位有了绝对的下降；即使是在极为有限的庭审案件中，案件管理运动中的干预和效率思想，已经随着案件管理运动的不断深入，从审前程序出发，蔓延到了庭审程序，逐渐侵蚀着庭审程序中的传统民事对抗制；相比审前程序而言，庭审程序是传统民事对抗制的保留地，其对抗性的下降程度较为有限。第六章为关于英美民事对抗制的未来、评价和启示。该部分内容是对于第二、三章宏观描述，以及第四、五章微观制度研究，所进行的一个概括性总结。此部分内容围绕着民事对抗制的现状和未来、民事对抗制的评价，以及对于我国的启示三个方面展开。首先，对于民事对抗制的现状，展开民事审前程序和民事庭审程序的全面研究，结论是古典民事对抗制处于全面衰落状态，但并没有完全充分的证据得出对抗制已告终结的结论，那种宣称管理型司法已经为民事对抗制划上了一个句号的说法，还为时过早。古典对抗制在案件管理的修正下，变为一种以管理型司法为表现形式的现代民事对抗制，对于法院职权因素进行了强化，使得个人和国家之间的关系更加合理。其次，对于民事对抗制的未来，关于许多人对于管理型司法的继续发展将会彻底颠覆传统的民事对抗制诉讼的担心这一问题，经过对于对抗制的文化、社会基础进行分析之后，作者认为这种可能性较小，因为强大的律师阶层不会允许以案件管理为特征的民事司法改革脱离对抗制而彻底走向职权制，这违反了职业群体意愿并将导致其整体利益的损害。再次，作者将英国美国进行比较，发现英国对于对抗制的修正力度更大，并且分析了原因；又将中国与英美进行比较，发现修订后的民事诉讼法典条文虽已非常接近，但是两者民事诉讼制度性质迥然有异。最后，关于对抗制对于我国的启示，主要从国内是否应当学习和借鉴对抗制模式提出自己的建议，认为在法院收集调查证据方面应当坚持事实发现的对抗制；总结了《复杂诉讼指南》和《民事诉讼管理手册》系列的宝贵经验；以及我国对于民事对抗制的借鉴，认为对抗制在事实发现上中立性，将使其赢得我国法官群体和律师团体的支持。文章的基本结论是：民事对抗制的变化，就好比一滴水滴，透过对于这颗水滴的观察，可以折射出自由主义这片天空，所经历的一切风云变幻。更多还原

【Abstract】 Adversary leads to judgment. There’s no justice without Adversary. Theexistence/comparison between judge and litigant are the essential parts of all civilprocedure system. Civil adversary system, represented by the judicial system inUK/USA, emphasizes the dominant power of litigant over Judicial Trial procedureagainst the arbitrary of judge, which highlights the essence of fundamental principleof Procedural Liberalism. Civil procedure is a changing field, and by studying thetheory, the value and the historical background, it will help us to understand and graspthe dynamic field and the significance meaning behind the changes. Throughassimilating, referring, or criticizing and reconstructing, all the civil procedurereforming in modern society had to be based on adversary lawsuit pattern. Thisdissertation is trying to give a systematic round review of the history of US/UK civiladversary system in the context of Chinese. Observing the western society and itsoperation of civil trial power based the theory of ideologist.The initial intention of this dissertation is to give a whole picture how civiladversary system works. In the past decades, what changes civil adversary system hadexperienced, and will be facing. Based on the US case management movement as thebreakthrough point, this paper has given a whole idea about the origin of civil adversary system, its vigorous developments and declining. Also it gives a projectanalysis for evidence discovery in pretrial procedure, cross examination in court trialprocedure and jury system, barrister system, explaining the principle of adversaryprocedure, the background and practice environment influenced, particularlydescribed the revision of adversary system itself in recent years. It reviewed theinternal regularity connection between liberalism and civil adversary system, with theprospects for the future development trends of civil adversary system, and how itinspires our civil judiciary reforming in China.One of the goals in this dissertation is to provide some enriched legal documents,with detailed records and data analysis of each part of civil adversary system and theirinternal relationships, trying for the information maximization. Besides the above, weare trying to find the relatively stable essence from the complex diverse phenomena.Through the study, we learnt that the popular and declining of civil adversary systemhave been influenced by the economics, politics and social status varied in specifichistorical stage of each country. Civil adversary system and liberalism are derivedfrom the same origin, and each significant change of liberalism will sooner or laterreflected in judicial system, leads the civil adversary system to develop into next stage.Though the future is unpredictable, civil adversary system is developing along arelatively stable rule, which is trading-offs between justice and efficiency, andbalancing between freedom and equality.There’re total six paragraphs in this dissertation.First paragraph is the general description of civil adversary system. It mainlyintroduces the concepts, characters and judicial duty model. Then it particularlydescribed the origin of adversary system and its formal establishment in UK, and howit’s been carried forward in USA. Secondly, it gives a politicized interpretation herefor the civil adversary system. The one behind civil adversary is reflecting procedureliberalism, and liberty is the core value factor of adversary system, therefore wereviewed the deep relationship between procedure law and liberty, law and freedom.At last, the author had concluded eight points about the research of adversary system,after defining the concepts of civil adversary system, comparing such concepts and studying the historic development of adversary system.Second paragraph is a brief overview of the evolvement of civil adversarysystem in USA after the Second World War. Since this dissertation is based on thestudy of USA case management system, the content in this paragraph related to USAis one of the key points in this paper. Based on the factors of politics, economics,culture, society and law development etc in USA, there’s two phases in USA for thedeveloping of civil adversary system after The Second World War: Booming period in1945~1960s, and declining period in1970s~2010s, this paper gives a generalblueprint to provide the overall concepts about the changing of civil adversary system.The case management movement developed in1960s in USA is a serious challenge totraditional adversary system; therefore the declining of civil adversary system isclosely connected with the rise of case management movement. This part gives a briefintroduction about the developing of USA case management movement, andspecifically introduced how the movement performs, with the analysis of ABA’sStandards Relating to Court Delay Reduction, FJC’s Manual for Complex Litigation,Judicial Conference’s Civil Litigation Management Manual, The Congress’ FederalRules of Civil Procedure, and The Civil Justice Reform Act.Third paragraph gives a general idea about the developing of civil adversarysystem in UK after the Second World War. Since UK is the origin country of civiladversary system, it’s indispensable for us to review the UK system. The civiladversary system had been originated in UK, and reached the peak in USA; thereforewe can say that USA has given much more contribution to the system than UK did inmodern ages. Even though, studying the system in UK will help us to compare thesame in USA, and diversifying the study through different points of view. Comparingthe content in second paragraph, this part has less profundity which is just forcomparison.The fourth paragraph is about the changes of civil adversary system in pretrialprocedure after the Second World War. Starting from this paragraph, detailed reviewsare being given to each regime of the system. Since pretrial procedure is the essentialpart of present civil procedure and the main scope of case management movement, this part is one of the key points in this paper. This part composite the elements ofregulation changes, case development, scholars’ comments and relevant data etc, tosupport the study and explanation for each regime in details. It consist with eightsections inc. the summarization of civil pretrial procedure, nonsuit, pretrial conference,disclosure, discovery, summary judgment, ADR, settlement, legal execution, andclosure, while six of them are related to pretrial procedure. The conclusion of thisparagraph is: though laissez faire civil adversary system is basically exited from thepretrial procedure, and the pretrial procedures in UK/USA are mostly dominated bycase management mode, pretrial procedure is still not changing to inquisitorial systemwhich the court takes over the jobs of litigant totally, while the litigant still takes careof its own suit, and the court is mainly concentrating on the procedure controlling.The strengthening of judge power is for monitoring and controlling the proceduredevelopments. So the pretrial procedure in UK/USA is managerial judiciary mode,and this mode is indeed a revised modern civil adversary system, which admit andaccept necessary judicial intervention, balancing the needs of rights protection forlitigant and efficient usage of the whole judicial resources, concerning about both thepersonnel interests and social interests, is a kind of individual value priority with theconsideration of social benefits.The Fifth paragraph is about the change of civil adversary system in court trialprocedure. Case opening procedure is one of the most important procedures in civiladversary trial, which consist both oralism and adversary system. This paragraphmainly gives the sort and summary of case management rights during court trial inUK and USA, choosing civil jury system and cross examination system for specialstudy. By studying of these two typical systems, and their serial changes after theSecond World War, with the presentation of many law rule changes, case developmentand data, this part clearly described the moving process of civil adversary in court trialprocedure. The conclusion of the paragraph is: Court trial procedure is not theessential part of civil procedure any more. Due to the mass decreasing of casescoming into court trial procedure, its status had been clearly downgraded. Even insome cases involving court trial procedure, due to the intervention of case management movement and efficiency thoughts, starting from the pretrial procedureto the court trial, it affects the traditional civil adversary system in court trial.Comparing to the pretrial procedure, court trial is the reservation for traditional civiladversary system, which still has the antagonism.The Sixth paragraph is evaluation and revelation of civil adversary system inUK/USA. This part is mainly a brief summary for paragraph2and3(MacroDescription),4and5(Micro research of the systems). It contains macroscopic aspectssuch as the future of civil adversary system, evaluation of civil adversary system, thereference of USA civil adversary system to China, and specific system constructionsuch as revelation of civil adversary system, whether the civil adversary systemshould be applied in China, and the adversary system regarding the evidentialinvestigation in court, the revelation of Manual for Complex Litigation and CivilLitigation Management Manual to our civil judicial reforming etc. Last but not theleast, the conclusion of this paper: the development of civil adversary system is like adrop of water. Observation of the droplet will reflect the big sky of liberalism which isexperiencing all changes.更多还原