Study On The Type Of Joint Tort Litigation

China's current judicatory practice has been treated the litigation of joint tort as the compulsory joinder, which requests the victim must charge all of the joint tortfeasors. While the article 13 of tort liability law provides the victim shall have the right to request part or all of the joint tortfeasors who are liable for damages. On this regulation there are conflicts in this regulation of Civil law and procedural law. This thesis is demonstrated by the wiring paint studying of civil substantive law and the civil procedure law. With the help with procedural law of theoretical arguments, I have found joint tort litigation should belong to permissive joinder, and through the procedure of internal system consummation, I have tried to solve the problem of low efficiency caused by allowing the victim of the common infringer successively prosecution.This thesis points four parts closely around the type of joint tort litigation.The first part is legal application of the joint tort litigation. Through a small case, I have preset four questions to point the key of this case is the form of joint tort litigation, and the later parts are still discussed closely around the four questions. This section mainly discusses legal provisions of the substantive law and procedural law on common tort litigation, and points out the confusion in the provisions of the law and the casualness in optional practice, and also revealed the value and meaning of this study.The second part is different theories of joint tort litigation. Our litigation has use"object of civil action"to divide the joinder into compulsory joinder and permissive joinder, while other civil law countries use "judge at once" as the division standard, and divide compulsory joinder into inherent necessary joinder and analogous necessary joinder. The educational ideas have allowed quasi-joinder as the type of indispensable joinder. In considering about the types of joinder at home and abroad, the author have found we can not divide joinder type without the object of civil action, which is more logically favorable for the harmony of joinder system , and also conforms to ways of thinking of the continental law scholars. Because of the unmatched provisions in substantive law and procedural law about joinder, the general provision in current civil lawsuit, and the own complexity of joint tort litigation, there are many different viewpoints around circles on the type of joint tort litigation. In this part the author briefly introduced those different views. The third part is the qualitative analysis of joint tort litigation, which is the difficulty of this thesis. Based on joint tort litigation theory which is introduced in the second part , and in accordance with the joinder of logic division, the author successively excludes inherent necessary joinder and analogous necessary joinder ,and gets the final conclusion--permissive joinder.The types of joinder are classified without the theory of object. In corresponding to the basic paradigm of "claim - actio", the author criticizes the idea of inherent compulsory joinder with the theory of the plural of joint debts, so the victim shall have the right to simultaneously or successively claim for damages to part or all of the infringers. However, there are conflicts between absolute effect existing in joint tort system and the relative effect existing in the theory concerning the fixed validity of judgment (FVJ). This conflict must be resolved in theory and in practice. We have two solutions: one is the expansion theory of FVJ, the other is mirror effect. In a joint tort litigation, if the victim prosecutes co-tortfeasors successively, judge cannot directly invoke the expansion theory of FVJ because the objects are different in these litigations. While we can exactly solve absolute effect matters with the reflected validity theory rather than the theory of FVJ which is one of remarkable characteristics in analogous necessary joinder, and therefore we choose permissive joinder in the current joinder types.The fourth part is perfection and application of related supporting system on joint tort litigation. This part mainly deals with the practice of the joint tort litigation, solves relevance between joint tortfeasors from system and improves the efficiency of lawsuit.Permissive joinder is characterized as independence, but we emphasize not only independence but also the relevance between joint tortfeasors. At this moment we need to mention two principles -- advocated the principle of common claim and the principle of common evidence, which are important for joinder on these cases causing by the same events or the same purposes.There have been some articles criticizing the idea of permissive joinder on the grounds of efficiency. However we can utilize the third party without independent right to claim rather than compulsory joinder to put relative parties in one suit. Through this system we can perfectly solve the claim from debtors.