侵權按份責任訴訟形態研究－－以《侵權責任法》第12條的司法適用為中心

A Study on Tort Proportional Liability Litigation Forms: Centered on the Judicial Application of Article 12 in Tortious Liability Law

侵權按份責任具有“內外關係上的按份性＂，是其與連帶責任、不真正連帶責任、補充責任的重要區別。在訴訟形態的選擇上，針對“內外關係上的按份性”，有適用必要共同訴訟與普通共同訴訟兩種對立的觀點。案例分析表明，實踐中對待侵權按份責任所適用訴訟形態亦呈現出多樣化、任意化的特點，未形成統一做法。其原因包括我國缺少將債與訴訟形態相聯繫這一大陸法系的基本方式，且我國民事程序法的訴訟形態規定過於粗疏而缺乏可操作性。應採取特殊化、具體化的解釋路徑解決此問題，允許權利人起訴全部或部分按份責任人承擔責任。基於糾紛的一次性解決和權利實現的可能性，撤回部分起訴應受到時間和具體理由的限制。在權利人部分起訴時，基於查明事實和保障其他侵權人利益的目的，其他侵權人可以無獨立請求權第三人的身份加入訴訟。在存在未知名侵權人時，適用單獨訴訟，直接對此作出裁判。

Tort proportional liability is of proportional for both internal and external relationships. It is different from joint liability, unreal joint liability and complimentary liability of tort. In choosing the forms of litigation according to this feature, there are two modes: indispensable joint litigation and common joint litigation. The analyses of case show that the practice of litigation forms exhibit diversity. From one aspect, we are lacking in debt law so that we cannot connect litigation forms with the forms of debt. From another aspect, the litigation form of civil procedure law fall behind. We should take special methods to solve this problem. The creditors are allowed to sue all or parts of the responsible. For the aim of solving the problem together, withdrawal should be constrained in time and matter. When the creditors sue part of the responsible, as for the aim of finding the truth and protect the interest of other responsible, they could join the suit as the third party without an independent claims. When there exits an unknown tort, we should just make a judgments directly.