The Research Of The Action For Interlocutory Declaration

With regard to objective and scope of res judicata issue, the civil law tradition of civil litigation as a res judicata theory, subject matter of litigation the sole criteria for determining the scope and objective. For a long time, civil law experts abide by the "subject matter of litigation the boundaries of = the dispositif of the objective to determine the scope of the matter = res judicata," this principle, the formula. But also in the legislation is also the position taken by the traditional theory. However, the reasonableness of this position has been the case in reality a series of difficult challenges, stick to the old doctrine has apparently unable to adapt to the requirements of the modern civil, with the old and new in-depth subject matter of litigation the controversy started, or the position of the German common law in this era of the legislative adoption of the Civil Procedure Law from the time when there will be continuous and objective scholars of this res judicata frequently questioned the scope of the traditional position of. To compensate for the limitations of traditional theory, scholars adhering to this traditional theory, under the premise of action for interlocutory declaration created a system to address the reasons for the sentence in the matter of the binding force, so as to avoid contradictions in the court decision, the realization of economic action. However, the objective of China's scholars in the study the scope of res judicata issue, the scholars are mostly confined to the immediate expansion of the position of res judicata for discussion, but from the perspective of the middle confirmation v. to understand discussion of this issue is almost a rare. While some articles mentioned in the middle of the domestic v. confirmation system, but only a brief introduction of this system is to avoid conflicts referee functions, for the nature of this system had few problems in-depth analysis, so that the academia has yet to confirm the system brought to its intermediate the attention it deserves. This article aims of this study make a tentative discussion of the blind spot.The first part of this article discusses the confirmation of the middle generation and function of v.. This should be recognized in the middle of a logical starting point for v. V. the right recognized in the middle of the study should start here, need to join the. In the part of the discussion, through practical case studies, starting with the traditional limitations of the scope of res judicata and objective analysis of the middle to proceed to confirm the cause of the v. Article analyzes the deficiencies of the traditional res judicata theory, discusses the two approaches to overcome this shortcoming, that is, stick to the position of the traditional theory of "subject matter of litigation position" and based on principles of procedural safeguards, "the direct expansion of the scope of res judicata and objective" position. Adhere to a previous position among recognized scholars to develop a system of v, while the latter insist on the position of the scholars have developed a series of res judicata doctrine to expand the scope and objective, which attracted more mature, and most scholars are concerned about a theory that is strive for efficiency theory. Strive for efficiency theory and the middle of the relationship between confirmation v. scholars have also become the focus of attention. Therefore, the author focuses on the middle of the next question of the function v confirmation, as well as the middle of confirmation v. strive for efficiency and the relationship between the. Author believes that, in the middle of the v. confirmed features include: (1) to prevent conflicts referees, (2) implementation of economic action, (3) to maintain the traditional position of the objective scope of res judicata. By these two functionally comparison, the authors believe that in acting on the reasons for the sentence to determine when the two are complementary in function, we can not replace each other.The second part of this analysis confirmed the middle of the core elements of the v - v recognized in the middle of the subject matter of litigation issues, and analysis of different subject matter of litigation doctrine recognized in the middle of the subject of litigation v. Recognized in the middle of v., in essence, is to confirm the complaint, the article first analysis confirmed that the subject of the proceedings of the v 3 fundamental questions. Followed by analysis of the actionable as an intermediary to confirm the subject of a pre-litigation legal relationship with the two types of meaning. The subject of litigation because the doctrine of res judicata decision in this v. the objective understanding of the scope of very different, which will certainly affect v. Department of the genus as the middle of litigation recognized in the scope of the subject of litigation v. The analysts believe that, in the traditional subject matter of litigation under the doctrine, in the middle of the v. to confirm the subject of litigation by the parties during the proceedings of this v. the idea of the impact, the only way to deny that when the non-recognition of the chief complaint among subject matter of litigation, but as a defense if the parties advocates, there are several substantive law, the defense claims there are more recognized in the middle of v. In the two sub-limbs, said, the suit covers the facts underlying the reasons, resulting in two sub-limbs referring to the next without intermediate confirmation of the v. A sub-limb, said, because the substantive law claims only subject matter of litigation in this v. the basis of the number of substantive law, so there is a claim may be made on the number of parties recognized in the middle of v. The new entity, said legal entity with the old law, said only, "competing claims" a different understanding and definition of the subject matter of litigation is no different, therefore, that under the new substantive law of the actionable analysis to confirm the middle of the old entity subject matter of litigation France speaking the same.This paper analyzes the middle of the third part of v. The elements identified with the procedural issues. The complaint of the middle of confirmation proceedings in this v. Department is raised in proceedings in the nature of actionable merger or change, so must have actionable merger or change the general conditions of. In particular, the institute recognized in the middle of v. should have five conditions: (1) time element. V. to bring the time between confirmation of the only trial in this v. Department of fact and in words, before the end of the debate, (2) subject matter of litigation elements. The parties dispute only because they have a pre-request to confirm the relationship, (3) of the main elements. The middle of the chief complaint filed to confirm only the parties of the chief complaint, (4) the jurisdiction of the elements. Recognized in the middle of v. v must belong to the same with the Court's jurisdiction, (5) Elements of the proceedings. Recognized in the middle of v. v must be able to apply with the same kinds of legal proceedings. And then they recognized the middle of the chief complaint proceedings, proceedings, litigation agents permission issues, the v and the middle of the procedure to confirm the v. contacts made of special procedural matters discussed in.