| 關 鍵 詞： |
家事調解；調解前置；準諮商；訴外紛爭解決方案；調解基礎 |
| 中文摘要： |
依統計，二○一四年至二○一八年各一審法院每年平均終結 25,500 餘件家事調解事件，已發揮紓解訟源及減輕法官裁判負擔之效能。臺北地方法院更自二○一四年起，率先引進家事專辦調解法官制度，調解成效大幅增加。另有學者，以家事事件當事人需求出發，嘗試建構家事法院為「準諮商」法院，凡此，足證家事調解制度之於整體家事司法系統之重要性。家事調解制度在英國行之有年，有關家事調解制度的角色與定位，隸屬於行政福利之一環，而非是司法作用，家事調解委員自我角色認知如何，皆有清楚豐富實務操作規範可循，筆者期望藉由此文的探討，導入英國家事調解制度的介紹，體認家事法院與家事調解的功能，期能加強我國對於家事調解資源的重視，達成解決家事紛爭之立法目的。
|
| 英文關鍵詞： |
Family Mediation；Compulsory Mediation；A Quasi-Counseling Model；Alternative Dispute Resolution；The Rationale of Mediation |
| 英文摘要： |
According to judicial statistics from 2014-2018, mediation cases terminated in the first instance by the District Courts are up to 25,500 each year. This ADR has reduced backlogs of cases and lessen the judges’ caseloads in practice. The Family Division of the Taipei District Court in 2014 first adopted the full-time Mediator-Judge to make mediation cases more efficiently. Some suggests that family court shall adapt a quasi-counseling model in family court proceedings. All of these prove the significance of family mediation as to family justice system. The family mediation system in the UK has a long-time practice and it is classified as the category of the administrative service, rather than judiciary. In practice, it has developed clear guidelines to be followed relevant to the self-identity of the family mediator’s role. This article explores the rationale of family mediation in the UK, the difference of the role between family court and family mediation, in the hope of increasing the resources on family dispute resolution by mediation.
|
| 目 次： |
壹、前言
貳、英國家事事件之調解制度
一、英國家事司法系統
（一）完整網絡整合
（二）性質定位
二、家事調解理論基礎
（一）家事調解的優點與缺點
（二）家事調解的基礎原則
（三）家事調解員的角色
三、家事調解的實踐
（一）擴大調解制度的適用規模
（二）調解制度乃是對談大門開啟者，而非司法守門員
（三）評估家事紛爭透過訴訟解決之適合性
（四）調解制度對子女的責任
（五）調整當事人權力失衡
（六）隱私權保護
（七）調解結果的維持度
參、英國家事調解制度對我國之啟示
一、審判權與行政服務區分清楚
二、落實對當事人賦權
三、參與式和解的建構
肆、反思－代結論
一、「家事司法福利行政化」發展過程困境？
一、擴大調解前置的適用範圍可行性？
二、專任家事調解員培訓之可能性
|
| 相關法條： |
 |
| 相關判解： |
|
| 相關函釋： |
|
| 相關論著： |
|