管辖异议权，作为管辖制度的重要组成部分，在确保民事案件得到正确管辖，维护当事人诉讼利益等方面发挥着重要的作用。但由于我国立法对管辖异议权的规制过于简单，导致实务中大量管辖权异议案件涌现。在此背景下，了解管辖异议权在司法实践中的行使现状，对管辖异议权的滥用行为进行甄别并完善规制，对于保障民事诉讼活动得以顺利开展具有重要意义。

鉴于此，本文通过对管辖权异议案件的相关文书材料进行整理，了解到以下信息：近年来，管辖权异议案件数量呈猛增之势，至今仍居高不下。在裁判结果上，裁判结果多表现为法院不予支持的结果；在审查时间上，管辖权异议案件的审查时间也是比较长的；在异议理由方面，当事人提出的异议理由五花八门，其实不乏一些牵强附会的理由；在案件类型上，管辖权异议的提出主要出现在合同纠纷类案件中。通过对相关文书材料的整理，本文得出管辖异议权在司法实践中存在被滥用现实的结论。

其次，笔者通过对实务案件进行梳理，分析出管辖异议权在司法实践中被滥用的原因：一方面由于我国《民事诉讼法》对管辖异议权的行使缺乏相应的条件限制，导致实务中往往出现“一提就立”的情况；另一方面，相关司法程序与管辖权异议制度的衔接不畅、当事人受诉讼利益的诱惑以及法官对权利行使缺少相应释明，也是管辖权异议案件频现的原因。

再次，笔者梳理了两大法系中具有代表性的国家的相关法律规定，考察了这些国家的法律在管辖权异议制度上的共通之处及特点，并分析域外经验对完善我国管辖异议权的启示。

最后，本文尝试提出解决管辖异议权滥用这一问题的建议，以期促进管辖制度的运转回归到正轨上：一是完善管辖异议权的法律规制，包括明确权利行使条件、完善审查程序规定、严格案件审查期限、完善相应惩戒机制、调整案件诉讼费用；二是平衡异议权行使的成本与收益，包括调整案件诉讼费用、增设相关损害赔偿制度和完善相关的移送制度和送达程序；三是明确法官在受理案件时的释明义务。旨在从多个角度对管辖权异议制度进行完善，消除管辖异议权滥用之乱象。

The right of objection to jurisdiction，as an important right of civil litigants to participate in litigation activities, plays an important role in ensuring the correct jurisdiction of civil cases and safeguarding the litigants' litigation interests. However, the regulations on jurisdictional objection right in the Civil Procedure Law are too simple and lack of necessary restrictions on exercising this right, leading to a large number of cases of jurisdictional objection in judicial practice，and showing some abuses in practice. In this context, it is necessary to know the current situation of the exercising of this right，identify the abuse of this right and regulate it in judicial practice, so as to ensure the smooth operation of civil litigation.

In view of this, this paper sorts out the jurisdiction objection cases from 2011 to 2021 in the China Judgements Online and draws the following conclusions: In terms of the number of cases, since 2013, the number of jurisdiction objection cases has been soaring, and the number of cases was once close to 60,000. So far, the number of such cases is relatively large. In terms of judgment，a large number judgment results is not supported by the court. In terms of the adjudication time, nearly two-thirds of the adjudication time of jurisdiction objection cases is more than three months, which shows that the referral time of the court is relatively long. In terms of objection reasons, the parties put forward a variety of objection reasons, in fact, there are some cases based on far-fetched reasons. In terms of case types, jurisdictional objection cases mainly appear in contract disputes. Through summarize the relative data, this paper draws the conclusion that the jurisdictional objection right is abused in judicial practice.

Secondly, by sorted out specific cases，I analyzed reasons of the abuse on jurisdictional objection rights：on the one hand, because of the lack of corresponding conditions on Civil Procedure Law, resulting in the high acceptance by the court once the litigant file an objection．On the other hand, the unsmooth connection between judicial procedures and jurisdiction objection system，and the temptation of litigation interests, which is also the reason for the frequent occurrence of jurisdiction objection cases.

Finally, in order to promote the operation of jurisdiction system，this paper attempts to put forward some suggestions to solve the problem of the abuse：The first is to improve the legal regulation of the jurisdiction objection right, including clarifying the conditions of exercising the right, improving the provisions of the examination procedure, placing restrictions on the time of the case adjudication, improving the corresponding punishment mechanism, adjusting the litigation costs of the case, and reducing the possibility of abuse of the system from the source；The second is to balance the costs and benefits which brought by the abusing of the right，including adjusting the litigation costs of the cases, establishing the relevant damage compensation systems, and improving relevant judgment document transfer systems and service procedures; The third is to set up judges' obligation of explanation when objections were filed. All of this aims to improve the jurisdictional objection system，and dissolve the chaos of the abuse of jurisdictional objection rights.