English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 118658/149719 (79%)
Visitors : 80581894      Online Users : 3293
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/158183


    Title: 法律詮釋或事實審查之實證分析─以最高法院2011上半年度發回更審之民事判決為對象
    Interpretation of Laws or Review of Facts-Focusing on the Judgments of the Supreme Court Reversing the Judgments of the Courts of Second Instance during the First Half Year of 2011
    Authors: 許政賢
    Contributors: 法律系
    Keywords: 違背法令;法之續造;原則上重要性;上訴許可制
    in contravention of the laws and regulations;the continued development of the laws;significant in principle;permission of an appeal
    Date: 2019-10
    Issue Date: 2025-07-30 11:57:53 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 民訴法於2003年間增訂第469條之1規定，其中所指法之續造、確保裁判之一致性，係參考德國民訴法第511條、第543條規定，而採行上訴許可制，在要件上已較修法前趨於嚴格。但在實務上，最高法院似未放棄1990年第1次民事庭決議所建立標準，仍對原審判決所認定事實加以審查，並積極扮演個案救濟之角色。換言之，目前最高法院之主要任務，仍係糾正下級審法院之裁判上錯誤，並非專注於法律解釋與適用。「2017年司改會議」再次重申第三審應以詮釋法律之重要內涵為主要任務，而以近10年內之統計資料而言，原審判決遭廢棄發回之比例超過百分之二十，則以此種現實條件，逕將最高法院之功能嚴格限定以法律解釋與適用為主，是否妥適，似有疑義。本計畫擬進一步追蹤並分析廢棄發回判決與裁判正確性之關係，以釐清廢棄發回率是否等同個案救濟正確率，以期對於金字塔訴訟制度之建構，及最高法院法律審任務之定位，及司法行政當局在推動相關政策之設計上，提供重要參考資料。
    According to the second paragraph of Article 469-1: ” The permission provided in the preceding paragraph shall be granted only when such an appeal is necessary for the continued development of the laws, or to ensure coherence of decisions, or when other legal opinions involved are significant in principle.“ The intention of the legislator has make effort to redefine the function of the Supreme Court regarding the review of the final judgment of a court of second instance. However, the Supreme Court has followed the established standards in regard with the grounds that the original judgment is in contravention of the laws and regulations. This development has initiated some reforms in recent years and also stimulated intense discussion. In this context the author tries to conduct an empirical study in which the judgments of the Supreme Court reversing the judgments of the courts of second instance during the first half year of 2011 will be examined by empirical method. The result of this study may contribute to the decision-making process of the policy maker and the researcher as well.
    Relation: 科技部, MOST107-2410-H004-060, 107.08-108.07
    Data Type: report
    Appears in Collections:[法律學系] 國科會研究計畫

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML29View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback