家事審判中職權探知的限度

我國家事程式正在從普通民事程式中分離。家事審判實行職權探知主義已系共識，但裁判資料的形成與事實調查權的具體配置，卻仍處於理論盲區、制度空白、實務混亂的狀態。“當事人權”作為分析工具，既可以從理論上區分中國以訴訟體制定義的訴訟模式論與大陸法系訴訟結構模式論下的辯論主義和職權主義，又可以從制度上厘清家事審判在職權主義原則下法官特有的事實調查權和當事人協助義務，與普通民事訴訟在辯論主義原則下的當事人自治及其例外情形，以及超越訴訟模式而基於訴訟主體地位無差別共用的“當事人權”及其相應的主體義務三者之間在適用範圍、適用條件及法律後果上的差異，從而探求我國家事審判從普通民事訴訟體系中剝離後職權探知的限度。

In the process of the separation of family procedure from ordinary civil procedure, there is a consensus on the doctrine of judicial discovery of facts in family cases. However, the rules and theories of the specific allocation of power and duty of proof collection and fact investigation are still missing or confusing. The concept of ''basic rights of litigants'' introduced here as a new theoretical analysis tool is helpful, which can define judicial power of fact investigation specially operated in family trials and the ''basic rights of litigants'' that transcend any trial mode but are based on the status as a party of the litigation(a litigation body), who undertakes corresponding basic obligations. In this way, the limits of judicial power of fact investigation after the family trial is separated from the ordinary civil litigation system can be explored.