| 篇名 |
商業事件假扣押債務人之抗告權保障──最高法院112年度台抗字第286號裁定評釋 |
| 並列篇名 |
The Protection of Right to Interlocutory Appeal of Debtors in Provisional Attachment in Commercial Cases－Comments on Ruling No. 286 of the Supreme Court in 2023 |
| 作者 |
許士宦 |
| 中文摘要 |
本件最高法院裁定為確保商業事件債權人之保全請求權及賦與債務人程序權保障，固就商審法為合憲性解釋，於債務人對商業法院所為准許假扣押裁定向最高法院提起抗告之情形，允許其得提出影響裁判結果即否定被保全權利或保全必要性之新事證，惟仍維持最高法院為法律審，對此事證不為調查、認定，致須廢棄發回原法院。是為平衡兼顧債權人之暫時性權利保護、債務人之聽審請求權保障與維持最高法院為法律審制，應由原法院就抗告事件行再度考案，俾為適時適式之審判，避免發生突襲性裁判。 |
| 英文摘要 |
This ruling of the Supreme Court interprets the Commercial Case Adjudication Act in a constitutionality way with an eye to ensure the creditor’s right to claim for provisional measures of protection and the debtor’s procedural guarantees, with its conclusion permits the party to present new evidence that may make the court to deny either the right which is in need of provisional protection, or the necessity of provisional measures of protection. However, this ruling still upholds the idea that the Supreme Court is the trial of law, thus it must reverse and remand the rulings of the original instance. In order to strike a balance between the creditor’s provisional protection of rights, the debtor’s right to be heard and the maintenance of the Supreme Court as the trail of law, the original court should re-examine the interlocutory appeal, so as to make the trial timely and appropriate and to avoid unexpected verdicts. |
| 起訖頁 |
38-59 |
| 關鍵詞 |
暫時性權利保護制度、保全請求權、程序保障、再度考案、突襲性裁判、Provisional Measures of Protection、Right to Claim for Provisional Measures of Protection、Procedural Guarantees、Revisit、Unexpected Verdict |
| 刊名 |
月旦法學雜誌 |
| 出版單位 |
元照出版公司
|
| 期數 |
202409 (352期) |
| DOI |
10.53106/1025593135203 複製DOI DOI申請 |
| QRCode |
 |
| |
