法學期刊.
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 勞動團體訴訟之發展及制度變革:兼論消費者團體訴訟制度之修正(Developments of Labor Collective Action and New Changes)
編著譯者: 沈冠伶
出版日期: 2020.12
刊登出處: 台灣/國立臺灣大學法學論叢第 49 卷 第 4 期 /1979-2027 頁
頁  數: 49 點閱次數: 833
下載點數: 196 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 國立臺灣大學法律學院
關 鍵 詞: 勞動訴訟團體訴訟不作為訴訟訴訟擔當共通爭點確認訴訟公告曉示追加選定
中文摘要: 本文以勞動事件法之勞動團體訴訟制度為研究對象,參考德國法及歐盟指令修正建議案之相關規定,探討如何能有效率地就多數勞工與雇主間所生紛爭進行訴訟。勞動團體訴訟之型態有二:其一係不作為請求之法定訴訟擔當團體訴訟,不必先經主管機關同意,而由法院審查起訴之工會作為原告之適格性,及訴訟上捨棄、撤回及和解之適當性;其二係意定訴訟擔當團體訴訟,關於加班費、退休金或損害賠償之給付請求,工會得經其會員之選定提起給付訴訟,並新設共通爭點確認訴訟,結合公告曉示制度,以擴大一道程序解決紛爭之機能,兼顧司法資源合理運用之訴訟經濟及保護當事人之程序利益,較德國法更能保護多數勞工之利益。為使被選定人能盡早追加共通爭點確認訴訟,法院應先行爭點整理,適時闡明原告為適當之聲明,如有必要亦得一次提出數項聲明。且為完足對於選定人之程序保障,應使其於和解成立前知悉和解之內容,以決定是否撤回選定,或願受和解效力所拘束。
勞動團體訴訟對於消費者損害賠償訴訟制度深具啟發性,在強化法院對於原告適格性及和解之審查、示範中間確認訴訟之追加及擴大公告曉示制度之運用,均可作為消費者保護法及民事訴訟法相關規定修正之參考。
英文關鍵詞: labor actioncollective actionaction for an injunctionlitigation in one’s own name on another’s behalfdeclaratory judgment confirming the common basis prerequisitespublic announcementsopt-in
英文摘要: This article discussed the labor collective action system in the Labor Incident Law implemented on January 1, 2020. A new labor collective lawsuit system will be introduced to handle disputes between multiple workers and their employer more effectively. Regarding the action for injunction, which is the litigation in labor union’s own name on labor’s behalf according to the Law, the plaintiff’s standing of labor union is reviewed by the court, but not by labor administrative authorities anymore. The withdrawal, abandonment or settlement of the lawsuit shall also be subject to the approval of the court. This legislation is welcomed and can be used as a reference for future amendments to Article 44-3 of the Civil Procedure Law.
Regarding the overtime pay, pension or damages, the labor collective action for payment can be filed by a labor union only authorized by its members, which protects the interests of workers better than the German law. In order to avoid separately litigating and contradictable judgments, the plaintiff can file additional claims before the end of oral arguments in the first instance trial, and request a declaratory judgment confirming the existence of the common basis prerequisites concerning claim and legal relationship between the appointing persons and the defendant. Concerning the additional claim, the court should give priority to conducting the argument and adjudication; before the adjudication concerning the additional claim is finalized, the original litigation proceedings may be stayed by the court. Moreover, combined with the public announcement of the action, more labors could opt into the group action. Based on the complexity of collective action, the court shall assist both parties to formulate issues and elucidate important legal or factual issues so that the plaintiff can submit proper motions as early as possible. If the labor union and defendant want to settle, the appointing parties should be notified of the content of the settlement agreement, and have the opportunity to withdraw their authorization of litigating to protect their procedural and material rights.
目  次: 壹、前言
貳、我國勞動團體訴訟之發展
參、德國法上勞動團體訴訟與消費者團體示範確認訴訟
一、勞動團體訴訟
二、消費者團體示範確認訴訟之借鏡
肆、我國勞動團體訴訟之特色
一、適格之團體
二、法定訴訟擔當團體訴訟:不作為訴訟
三、意定訴訟擔當團體訴訟
伍、勞動團體訴訟制度對於其他團體訴訟之啟發
一、強化法院對於程序處分之監督
二、示範確認訴訟之追加
三、公告曉示及追加選定制度之充實
陸、結論
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
    相關論著:
    返回功能列