摘要：

我国立法及司法解释为再审和第三人撤销之诉的启动设定了不同的要件，使得两类诉讼程序所涉及的基本要件事实存在着较大差异。即便再审程序和第三人撤销之诉就同一裁判文书或调解书作出不同的处理，也不能将之定性为矛盾裁判。因为对矛盾裁判的认定须同时结合裁判主文以及裁判理由进行，而要件事实的判断是裁判理由的重要组成部分。因此，唯有当存在作出矛盾裁判的风险时，才有必要将第三人的诉讼请求并入再审程序，其余情况下法院可分开审理。而程序合并后法院对当事人及第三人已实施诉讼行为的处理，应当符合程序保障的要求。

关键词: 再审程序, 第三人撤销之诉, 矛盾裁判, 程序合并, 程序规则

Abstract:

Laws and judicial interpretations in China put forward different requirements for commencing a retrial and a third-party revocation action，which leads to different facts constituting the essential elements between the two types of proceedings.In view of this，it is acceptable that a retrial and a third-party revocation action may yield different judgments on the same case.Such different judgments are not contradictory to each other because the identification of contradictory adjudication must be combined with the referee’s main text and the reasons for the adjudication，and the essential facts are an important part of the reasons for the adjudication.Therefore，there is no need to incorporate a third-party revocation action into the retrial of the same case unless there is a risk of contradictory judgments.And the effect of litigation actions before the incorporation shall be decided subject to the principle of procedural guarantees.

Key words: Retrial Procedure, Third-Party Revocation Action, Contradictory Judgments, Incorporation, Procedural Rules