Theoretical Analysis Of Regulatory Action Raids And System Construction

During the learning and the studying of the civil procedure laws, the author found that litigant assaults had happened in the lawsuits around China. Due to the gradual deepening of the concept of justice, litigation efficiency of action, effects on system reform of Justice, litigation efficiency realization of action become a hot topic in academic discussions, such as litigation evidence system, perform system mode, and the judicial system,, and appear in the judicial practice raids on this specific issue of the proceedings was not given the appropriate attention.Surprise is contrary to the basic legal principles of modern civil litigation proceedings, and litigation fair, benefits runs counter to the idea, not conducive to the realization of procedural justice and substantial justice. At present, China specific rules existing in the legal system and regulation of such acts is not reasonable. Therefore, this article is designed to surprise their analysis and related litigation issues of interpretation, trying to find out the starting-point of regulation action raids and value choice of finishing, surprise acts and regulations already in foreign litigation system on the basis for regulation system of construction litigation in China raids made humble. The author failed of trying to find regulations related to the assaults. As a result, I paid my attention on the researches focused on litigant assaults.This article includes the following aspects: The first part talk about that regulation action mainly on select raid as the object of study motivation and action raids against regulation of the relevant rules. In China, the discussion on regulatory action raids is a relatively new subject, research on this to some extent with theoretical significance and practical significance: conducive to deepening the understanding of action raids; conducive to improving the existing rules of civil procedure; conducive to the conduct of the proceedings in the judicial practice on raids of valid legal regulations.The second part of the basic issue of the case to the raids as a point, analysis surprise refers to the subject of litigation in action in the course of the proceedings in order to achieve a certain effect on procedural law, and implementation a while meet the requirements of procedural law in form, but it broke the original stability and order of proceedings, makes the litigation process and litigation results of unexpected sudden change status of an action. Includes three main categories namely: advocate surprise and referee, evidence of raids. Resulting action raids occurred, particularly in litigation proceedings guarded by the prevalent causes of behavior is diverse also. Based on the above analysis, I found raiding behavior has a wide variety of forms of action, involving all aspects of civil procedure. But such acts while participants in the proceedings to exercise procedural rights (force) appearance of a legitimate, its essence is to violations of the rights of participants in the proceedings, as well as civil action system. The third part by the under of litigation raids basic problem of analysis, author in third Department min in the think regulation litigation raids behavior is necessary of, on the class behavior of regulation is legal justice, and efficiency and order value of common pursuit, purpose is by on litigation party and trial who right (force) range of defined, balance litigation participation people attack and defense opportunities of possibilities, maintenance litigation legal of legitimate program, makes free, justice, and efficiency of legal value in civil method area within reached harmonious and unified. The fourth part action raids by foreign-related regulation system of rules, to how to prevent litigation raids provided some valuable system of reference. Current civil litigation in China raids on lack of integrity, and system of regulation of the behavior of systems, which allow only some of the terms of regulation and regulation functions cannot play. Therefore, it is necessary to establish some practical rules to improve the rules on regulatory action raids.