從家事紛爭當事人之「準諮商」需求談家事法院功能

The Counseling Function of Family Court and Family Dispute Resolution

家事紛爭的當事人，究竟需要法院為他們做些什麼？而當事人的這些需求，從家事事件法（與相關法制）、和家事法院（包含整體審理功能與審判資源）等現行資源來看，得以滿足當事人的需求嗎？如從訴訟經濟、訴訟集團現象、國家訴訟資源分配等角度，來檢視當事人之家事紛爭解決需求時，該如何分配才不致濫用訴訟資源？且兼顧到協助家事事件之當事人，得以更加自主且自律地進行家事紛爭解決？本文目標在於描繪分析出家事事件之多樣性、瑣碎性的特色，並探討以下問題：(一)家事法院的功能為何？是否可用「準諮商式」一詞說明家事事件法結構下的家事法院？(二)「準諮商式」功能的家事法院，是否符合家事紛爭的特性？與家事事件當事人的需求？(三)如當事人可被如此的「準諮商式」家事法院審理模式所滿足的話，未來我們將要對家事法採取何種詮釋方向與修法方向？並如何協助規劃其務實的資源配置？現行的家事法是否已經具備「準諮商式」之法院審理模式之條件？(四)如何從制度面、實踐面、當事人紛爭史等面向，來思考「準諮商式」家事法院之審理功能對現行家事紛爭與家事法院審理模式之必要性、與其侷限性？本文將提出兩則由實務判決改寫成的案例，並由判決書內所提及的細節、合併使用當事人召開媒體記者會之資料、以及作者進行家事調解的實證研究經驗等，說明本文所指出的家事事件之特性。同時，本文將說明，臺灣的家事法庭引入家事調解制度的過程，若干程度符合了民事程序法學在學說與實務潮流上，對訴訟機制的批評反省與修正之潮流。而這可能得以對應到本文所指出的「準諮商」模式的「必要性」之於家事法院功能。然而，本文也將說明「準諮商」模式的「侷限性」，係在其牽動了向來的民事程序法理，並對司法實務的各項資源分配產生挑戰。最後本文將指出，現行家事法設計下的「準諮商」模式的兩種可能發展樣態：一種是維持現行的準諮商審理模式，一種是將準諮商模式留置於調解程序，當調解不成立、進入訟爭程序時，回歸民事訴訟法理。經由作者對於家事事件當事人需求、家事法院審理功能的探討與分析，希望本文能略盡棉薄貢獻於未來法律解釋或立法政策之參考。

What do the disputants need in the family disputes? How the family court that is constructed by the newly passed Family Proceedings Act can do for the disputants? What is the core function of the family court? The author will propose a perspective of “quasi-counseling model of family court” to illustrate the dynamics of family dispute resolution. Providing the two stories of law, the author aims to discusses the following questions: 1. How the quasi-counseling model can be one of the interpretations of family court? 2. How can the interpretation of quasi-counseling family court apply to the distinguish character of family dispute? 3. What is the limitation of the family court? What is the law “can do” and “can not do”? How to contribute to the future modification of family law, family proceedings act, and civil procedure law by using the “quasi counseling model” as the interpretation? 4. How does the quasi-counseling model challenge the jurisprudence of family law as well as civil procedure law? For giving the comprehension of these issues, the paper will be organized into several parts. First of all, the author will explain the meaning quasi- counseling model of family and link her empirical study of family dispute mediation to this interpretation. Secondly, the author will illustrate two stories of law to discuss the needs and the character of family disputants. Thirdly, the author will discuss how the paradigm and idea changes brought into the jurisprudence of civil procedure law by family disputes. In the end, the author will propose two routes of family court for solving the family disputes as the conclusion.