法學期刊.
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 論德國民事訴訟法上之律師強制代理度-以民事訴訟之事實審為中心(Mandatory Legal Representation in German Civil Procedure Law: Focusing on Trial on Matters of Fact)
編著譯者: 陳瑋佑
出版日期: 2017.06
刊登出處: 台灣/中原財經法學第 38 期 /275-370 頁
頁  數: 95 點閱次數: 1850
下載點數: 380 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 陳瑋佑
關 鍵 詞: 律師訴訟本人訴訟律師代理律師責任律師酬金比較法
中文摘要: 在改革我國民事司法的諸多方案中,民事訴訟事實審之律師強制代理制度每每成為選項之一,蓋向來認為由律師即法律專家遂行訴訟係有利於司法資源之公益與當事人之私益。然而,強制當事人委任律師一事,亦不可避免地限制其接近使用法院之自由,且大幅提高進行訴訟之費用風險。因此,在立法論上,必須就律師強制代理制度之目的正當性、手段適合性與必要性,以及強化其利益與抑制其不利益之配套措施,進行徹底之檢討。為此,本文乃詳述德國民事訴訟上之訴訟代理制度設計、指出比較法上之不同規範模式、說明德國律師強制代理制度之合憲性與合目的性爭議並介紹相關周邊制度,以充實我國法之討論內容並提示評價現行規範之方向。
英文關鍵詞: legal representationself-representationrepresentation by attorneysattorney’s liabilityattorney’s feecomparative law
英文摘要: Mandatory legal representation in trial courts has always been one of the proposals when it comes to legal reform of civil procedural law since obtaining an attorney to deal with a lawsuit is deemed beneficial to both the public interest of judicial resources and the private interests of the parties. However, mandatory legal representation inevitably restricts the right of access to courts and significantly increases the risk of litigation costs. Hence, for the purpose of legislation, the proposal shall be closely scrutinized in terms of legitimacy of purposes, adequacy and necessity of means, and corresponding measures to safeguard benefits and mitigate downsides. To enrich content for legal discussion and to propose a direction for existing law, this Article expatiates on the legal representation scheme in Germany civil procedure law and then points out the different norms in comparative law. Next, the Article explains the issues of the constitutionality and the conformity to purposes of mandatory legal representation in Germany. The Article concludes with an introduction of related schemes and corresponding measures.
目  次: 壹、序言
貳、德國民事訴訟代理之規範狀態
一、律師訴訟
二、當事人訴訟
參、德國律師強制代理制度之質疑-內國與外國訴訟法之比較
一、德國其他程序法之不同規範模式
二、其他德國法系民訴法之不同規範模式
肆、德國律師強制代理制度之合憲性及合目的性
一、律師強制代理規範之合憲性
二、律師強制代理規範之合目的性
伍、德國律師強制代理制度之配套措施
一、過失歸責規定-兼論遲誤期間之可歸責性
二、律師民事責任-兼論「法官知法」原則之射程範圍
三、訴訟費用規範-兼論律師酬金之法定化要求
陸、結論
相關法條:
相關判解:
    相關函釋:
      相關論著:
      返回功能列