法學期刊.
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 送達之不知與民事訴訟法 164 條之回復原狀(Application of Art. 164 Formosan Civil Procedure Act in Remedy for Unawareness of the Service of Documents)
編著譯者: 王欽彥
出版日期: 2014.06
刊登出處: 台灣/靜宜法學第 3 期 /57-93 頁
頁  數: 23 點閱次數: 1646
下載點數: 92 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 王欽彥
關 鍵 詞: 送達訴訟權回復原狀再審不變期間
中文摘要: 於送達非本人親收之情形,不無可能本人未收到或未及時收到文書,待知悉時已遲誤期日、或遲誤得提起上訴或抗告、聲明異議等之法定期限。此際,民訴 164 條之回復原狀制度似可提供救濟,即本人於知悉後 10 日內仍為提起上訴等之訴訟行為,並主張其逾期係不應歸責,聲請法院准許其回復到遲誤前之狀態。若法院准許,則其上訴等將被視為係在期限內所為。本文對回復原狀制度對不知送達情形之救濟可能性加以考察,結論認為我國法院之法解釋十分嚴格,與德國、日本之狀況相對照,亦顯得十分不合理。
英文關鍵詞: Service of documentsright of access to the courtrestitutio in integrumretrialtime limit for appeal prescribed in the law
英文摘要: When the party of a civil process does not receive the service of documents from the court in person but through other alternative ways of service, in reality it happens that he or she might not receive the documents in time, so that when he or she is aware of the documents, the time limit for appeal has been elapsed. In this situation, Art.164 of Taiwanese Code of Civil Procedure provides a possibility for the party to restore his or her status in the process(Wiedereinsetzung in den vorigen Stand). This article analysis the situation in Taiwan and conclude that Taiwanese courts take an unreasonably strict construction of the above article in comparison with Japanese and German courts.
目  次: 壹、概説
貳、補充送達與回復原狀
參、寄存送達與回復原狀
肆、公示送達與回復原狀
伍、聲請回復原狀之一年期限
陸、結語
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
    相關論著:
      返回功能列