The Ananysis Of Period Of Immunity

Period of immunity, or scheduled period, is the prearranged existing period of certain rights of formation /which is directly regulated by law or agreed by the parties . When such period expires, the right is certainly eliminated. This system of time aims at eliminating the uncertain state which caused by the right of formation so as to maintain a steady legal relationship. The period of immunity is an academic phrase other than a legal phrase, there is no special phrase for it in civil law or other related law and regulations. As one of the important regulations of time, it is necessary to generally regulate the common issues, for instance, the definition, classification, pause, break, extension, etc. So that people will have a thorough knowledge of the civil legal results caused by duration of period. In the current civil law, it only regulates the system of the prescribed period for litigation, but not regulates the uniform system of the period of immunity at the same time. It is a pity not only for the further development of time regulation system, but also to the period of immunity system itself. This is also the reason why the author choose this subject as a research field. This article examines the historic origin of the period of immunity system through the definition and analysis of the object right of formation which direct towards by the period of immunity. This article also discusses the definition object legal effect pause and break of the period of immunity on the basis of comparing the other two kinds of regulations of time, that is to say the prescribed period for litigation and the period of lost right. Such effort aims to relatively fill the theoretical gap in this fields enrich the national civil regulations of time and fulfill the purpose of this writing.The first chapter of this article focuses on the origin of the period of immunity, and briefly introduces the evolutionary history of this system starting from its objective right of information, The second chapter discusses the nature, applied objected style term starting point pause break and extension of the period of immunity, and puts forward the author's own ideas. The author holds that the periodof immunity is the existing period, precisely speaking, it is the prearranged period of right of formation. The object which it applies for just only limits to the right of formation, and shall not be extended to other fields of rights, for instance, the right of control the right of defense and the right of claim. For the other rights of existing period, the author thinks they shall be restricted by other regulations of time. The period of immunity can be grouped into legal period of immunity and agreed period of immunity in accordance with its producing way; and it can also be classified into substantive period of immunity and procedural period of immunity in accordance with its applied objects, that is to say the substantive or procedural nature of right of formation. About the starting point of the period of immunity, the dominant theory is that the right starts from the date that the right comes into being, and it shall not be paused broken or extended no matter what happens. Among the Germany academic theory, there exists the classification of pure period of immunity and mixing period of immunity, and it is deemed that mixing period of immunity shall apply for the prescribed pause break and extension.But the author of this paper deems that the regulation of mixing period of immunity need further discussion. The author prefers that the period of immunity should strictly follow the legal regulation, regardless of any reasons, and it shall not be paused, broken or extended. The legal effect of the period of immunity is that the right of formation itself is eliminated, at this point, it greatly differs from the prescribed period for litigation. (While on the prescribed period for litigation, when the period is accomplished, the legal effect is that it merely makes the opposite party obtain the right of defense, but not violates the right of claim itself. ) In chapter 3, the author briefly describes the other two important regulations of time —the prescribed period for litigation and the period of lost right. Furthermore, the author makes a deep research of the period of immunity, through comparing the differences and connections between the period of immunity and other civil regulations of time. In chapter 4, the author defines the current controversial civil regulations of time, such as the withdrawing period, and the period of 20 years regulated by article 137 in chapter 7 of general principles of civil law, by using the theory of the period ofimmunity and on the basis of grasping the period of immunity system. After the overall discussions of chapter 4, the author lists the related regulations about the period of immunity in civil law in chapter 5, points out the defects in current law, and further provides the author's personal legal suggestions for the period of immunity. The author's suggestion is that a special chapter should be set to regulate the period of immunity, so as to make the general principles into a unified regulation, because it is a crucial important regulation of time as an existing period of right.