Reconstruction Of The System Of Intervenor With No Independent Right To Claims

The system of intervenor with no independent right to claims helps to maintain the rights and interests of parties and the third party in litigation, favorable to the court's just decision, and is an important system in the civil action. But there are certain defects in the system of intervenor with no independent right to claims in our country, and it is unable to realize the anticipated purpose of this system when it was set up. So, this article starts from the social practice. And based on the theory of action, it rationally learn from the system of intervenor with no independent right to claims in some foreign countries and attempts to restructure a harmonious and effective system of intervenor with no independent right to claims.The article is divided into four parts.First part: this part reveals the current situation in the system of intervenor with no independent right to claims in our country, and analyzes the defect and deficiency of this system on the legal provisions. Then it points out the problems of this system that exist in the judicature practice, and gives comments to various kinds of doctrines of this system in the theory circle.Second part: this part closely examines the relevant problems of the system of intervenor with no independent right to claims. It puts forward that the theory of action should be the basis of the system restructuring, and analyzes the special structure of the action of intervenor with no independent right to claims. Then it explains why the system of intervenor with no independent right to claims emerges, and gives some preliminary discussion on the affirming standard of intervenor with no independentright to claims.Third part: this part investigates the system of intervenor with no independent right to claims in the foreign countries. It separately investigates this system in the Anglo-American law system and the continental legal system, and carries on the key comparative research on the domestic related systems in the U.S A, Germany and Japan. And it draws conclusion that we cannot transplant the system of the third party in the U.S A but can properly learn from the system of the auxiliary intervention in the continental legal system after revising its defects.Fourth part: this part is about to restructure the system of intervenor with no independent right to claims in our country. It gives an overall reflection on the system of intervenor with no independent right to claims in our country, then propose the following opinions in the concrete restructuring: on the substantial standard and the procedural standard when intervenor with no independent right to claims takes part in an lawsuit, the core of the standards should be the bidirectional affected standard;intervenor with no independent right to claims takes part in an lawsuit in a non-actionable way, and we should set up the informative system, the examination and the objection procedure;intervenor with no independent right to claims is not a litigant, but a special party in a lawsuit, who is in an independent position and has extensive rights in the action;the decision has participating effects on intervenor with no independent right to claims. Finally, it brings up some relevant advices on the legislation of the system of intervenor with no independent right to claims in our country.