论中国民事诉讼中第三人撤销权行使方式的优化选择

Abstract

In special circumstances, the effective judgment between the parties is likely to affect the interests of third party. In most case the third party is vested with the right of revocation by civil procedural law in different nations. Which means, the third party has right to object to the parties’ effective judgement to protect his or her rights. However, the specific ways of exercising the right of revocation for the third party differ from nation to nation. At present, there are mainly two ways: the third party discharging the judgment and the third party retrial proceedings. The former mainly exists in France, Taiwan and mainland of China, while the latter is usually exists in the civil procedural laws of Japan, Italy, and Macao of China. Before the third party discharging the judgment was set up in “Civil Procedure Law” in the Taiwan of China, In order to provide a viable solution for setting the specific ways of exercising the right of revocation for the third party during the legislative process, scholars mainly conducted a comparative study of the third party’s petition for cancellation and litigation of retrial, After setting up the third party’s petition for cancellation in 2003, it mainly conducted an in-depth study on the improvement of the suit. Academic circles in mainland of China also experienced different research ideas before and after legislation. However, the difference between the mainland of China and the Taiwan region lies in the fact that there are two types of the third party’s revocation rights: the third party lodging a petition for cancellation or lodging a litigation of retrial. Therefore, it is still important to conducted a comparative study of them in order to solve the current parallel situations. This article focuses on the post-protection of third-party interests in civil litigation. Starting from the theoretical foundation, on the basis of the analysis of the existing methods of exercising the right of withdrawal of third parties in various countries. This article focuses on the differences between the third party discharging the judgment and the third party retrial proceedings. Finally, it is considered that the third discharging the judgment is an independent way of exercising the right of rescission by third parties who are self-sufficient in procedure. It not only realizes the complete protection of the interests of the third party, but also takes into account the interests of the parties, and it is superior to the retrial of the third party. From the perspective of the third party’s exercise of the right of revocation, we should cancel the third party retrial proceedings and only retain the third party discharging the judgment, ending the coexistence of the two modes. The theoretical value of this achievement is intensively reflected as a comparative analysis of the third party discharging the judgment and the third party retrial proceedings in theory, Through three aspects of comparative research reached a conclusion that the third party discharging the judgment is better than the third party retrial proceedings. Increasing the theoretical relationship between them to a new height. The practical value of this achievement is mainly reflected in the conclusion that the third party discharging the judgment is better than the third party retrial proceedings, analyzed in detail of the situation in parallel between these two ways and presented a solution to the current difficulties, so that it can guide later civil litigation legislation.