Research On Multiple Debtors’ Indernal Claim Relationship

The first part mainly introduces the theoretical foundation of internal claim relationship among the multiple debtors.At present, the other countries and regions in the world have admitted that the debtor has right to seek reimbursement from the produce.However,as for the claim about the foundation of a produce has many different points of view.Through list and evaluate these different views and comments,I think,the view which commons the law system deem that theoretical foundation produced of the right of claim is equity and reasonable.There is no equity exist in civil law countries, so in our country we can’t take equity as the theoretical foundation produced of the right of claim.But,I think as one of the important principles in Civil Law principle of equity can explain theoretical foundation produced of the right of claim,for we design the right of claim is in order to achieve the balance of interests between the debtors, which all is based on the principles of fairness.The principle of fairness can explain why the right of claim among the joint and several debtors produces,so the same with the untruthful joint and several debtors and added debtors.The second part mainly inspects whether exists claim relationship in all kinds of majority debt, and what the established conditions of their right of claim are.The principles of fairness is just the theoretical foundation of right of claim,it just provides right of claim a reasonable basis.the right of claim can really be set up,all kinds of the majority debt ought to satisfy two conditions:internally, all debtors bear their respective portion of debt; External, the debtor has the obligations to fulfill the debt. Of course,in different kinds of majority debts,the established conditions of right of claim not only should meet the above two common conditions, but also should have some specific other conditions, for example, in joint and several liability,it needs that the debtor perform his obligation to excess, the debtor because excess to perform was loss, the debtor that the debtor perform other debt lessen or destroyed. In the supplementary debt, in addition to need to add the debtor to fulfill debt actual besides, still added the debtor and the main requirements between the debtor has not be ruled out for the right of indemnity of the special relationship is produced.The third part mainly introduces some problems, which should be paid attention to, engender in right of claim’s specifically exercise,such as the restrictions of right’s exercise, scope, way and how to share when the right of claim can’t be satisfied. In my opinion, all sorts of different forms of debts, right of claim relationship, though they has some difference, there are still some common problems, such as the misdeed of scope, ask for compensation way, ask for compensation restrictions and so on.These common apply to one form of debt, and also apply to other forms.Of course, there is also existing some subtle difference, for example, one who can exercise the right, I think, in untruthful joint and several debt,only the debtor who is the ultimately responsible person enjoy the right.In supplement debt, only the add debtor who performs the debt enjoy the right.On how to share when the right of claim can’t be satisfied,I think,in joint and several liability,the insolvable part of debt should be shared between all the financial solvency debtors,but in supplement debt,when only exists bear corresponding responsibility of the debtor, the debtor assume only part of the debt repayment can’t risk, other remaining part by the obliges to bear.The fourth part mainly introduces the problems about majority debt appear in our country’s legislation and judicial practice, and proposes some advise to solve the above problems. From my view, in our country the current laws for majority debtors’ right of claim system and other related issues regulations are so simple.Because of not only the legislation is less, but also the content are not complete, which has led that the existing laws can’t regulate much case which appear in the judicial practice,such as untruthful joint and several debt cases. According to These problems it is necessary for us to pay more attention to and seek effective solutions. In the near future, we can t make some relevant rules by the judicial interpretation and separate. After the periods of the practice and development, we can redesign our country’s majority debt while we formulate the Civil Code.my suggestions are that we should use such majority debt’s classify:use as a debt, joint debt, untruthful joint and several debt and added debt.In addition,we also need to redesign some relevant rules,such as the internal and external effectiveness of debt,the scope of right of claim and how to share when the right of claim can’t be satisfied.