任重

摘要：《民法典》与《民事诉讼法》的简单相加不能自动带来《民法典》的正确实施。实施好《民法典》必然要求以民事诉讼目的作为体系连接点，实现实体/程序的系统整合。目的论在我国开创了民事诉讼基础理论研究的先河，是改革开放在民事诉讼法学研究中的具体成果。受比较法认识和实体法规模的双重时代局限，权利保护说（私权保护说）在我国并未获得足够重视。以民法典对诉讼实施的约束力为标准，“权利保护说→私法秩序维持说→纠纷解决说→程序保障说”呈递减趋势。以《德国民法典》的诉讼实施为参照，权利保护说和私法秩序维持说有相同的初衷，二者的区别更多体现在理念而非具体实现方法上。解决纠纷和程序保障是权利保护说的题中之义。由于忽视权利保护说的基石作用，囿于自身概念的模糊性，纠纷解决说在我国存在偏离《民法典》的重大风险，催生出任意超越和轻易否定实体权利的倾向，甚至将实体法律适用和民事纠纷解决对立起来。实施好《民法典》必然要求回归民事诉讼的起点，重塑以权利保护说为内核的民事诉讼目的论，将民事实体权利能否顺利认定和实现作为民事诉讼法典化和民事司法科学化的重要衡量标准。

关键词：民法典；民事诉讼目的；法典化；诉权；权利保护说；纠纷一次性解决

The implementation of civil code and the remolding of civil litigation purpose

Abstract：The simple addition of the civil code and the civil procedure law can not automatically bring about the correct implementation of the civil code.To implement the civil code well, it is necessary to take the purpose of civil litigation as the system connection point to realize the system integration of entity and procedure.The doctrine of purpose has pioneered the study of the basic theory of civil litigation in China and is a concrete result of reform and opening up in the study of civil litigation jurisprudence.Due to the limitations of both the comparative law understanding and the size of the substantive law, the rights protection theory (private rights protection theory) has not received sufficient attention in our country.Taking the binding force of civil code on the implementation of litigation as the standard, "the theory of right protection → the theory of private law order maintenance → the theory of dispute resolution → the theory of procedural guarantee" shows a decreasing trend.Taking the implementation of the German Civil Code as a reference, the protection of rights theory and the maintenance of private law and order share the same original intention, the difference between the two being more in the concept than in the specific method of implementation.Dispute resolution and procedural guarantee are the essence of the theory of right protection.By ignoring the cornerstone role of the rights protection doctrine and being caught in its own conceptual ambiguity, the dispute resolution doctrine in China runs a significant risk of deviating from the Civil Code, giving rise to a tendency to arbitrarily override and easily deny substantive rights, and even pitting the application of substantive law against civil dispute resolution.To implement the civil code well, it is necessary to return to the starting point of civil litigation, reshape the teleology of civil litigation with the theory of right protection as the core, and regard the smooth identification and Realization of civil substantive rights as an important standard to measure the codification of civil litigation and the scientization of Civil Justice.

Key words：The Civil Code；Purpose of civil proceedings；Canonisation；Right of appeal；Theory of rights protection；One-off dispute resolution