论文部分内容阅读
民事诉讼法第55条关于公益诉讼的规定提出了公益诉讼制度和代表人诉讼制度关系的思考。如果严格区分公益和私益,那么法院在受理环境污染诉讼和消费者利益诉讼时,应尽量区分公益和私益,以使这两种制度在立法上加以区分,上述两种制度为并列关系。相反,如果认为众多私益集合就可以成为公益,那么,关于公益和私益的区分就并不重要了,在此意义上,第54条和第55条成为递进关系。另外,如果正是因为行政机关在公共利益维护上的不足而导致公共利益受损,行政机关如作为原告要求法院完成本该由其完成的管理工作,其合理性又值得商榷。同时,法院在面对真正意义上的公益诉讼时,要发挥其作用则需要法院真正自主地位的确立以及法院功能的真正强大。
The provisions of Article 55 of the Civil Procedure Law on public interest litigation raise the issue of the relationship between the public interest litigation system and the representative litigation system. If the public welfare and private interests are strictly distinguished, courts should try their best to distinguish between public welfare and private interests when accepting environmental pollution litigation and consumer interests litigation so that the two systems can be distinguished in legislation. The two systems are in parallel relationship. On the contrary, if it is considered that many private interest pools can become public good, then the distinction between public welfare and private benefits is not important. In this sense, Article 54 and Article 55 become progressive relations. In addition, if it is because of public administrations’ lack of public interest that the public interest will be impaired, the administrative organ, as the plaintiff, will require the court to finish the management work that should be completed by it. The reasonableness of the administrative organ is debatable. At the same time, in the face of the real public interest litigation, the court needs to play its role in establishing the genuine autonomy of the court and the real power of the court.