The System Of Non-right Litigant’s Replacement

The non-right litigant replaced the system to be possible saying that was the civil actionlegal science key point and the difficulty. Our country’s civil action study is being in thelawsuit theory the renewal and the partial lawsuit system’s restructuring stage, is preciselyjumps out the former Soviet Union civil action theory with all one’s strength the diversion,returns the legitimate mainland legal system civil action system info. The litigant system hasbeen in the civil action theory important part, but replaces system’s research to the non-rightlitigant is helpful to again the profound understanding civil action’s elementary theory andconsummates the litigant institutional framework. The establishment establishment in meetsone’s satisfaction in the foundation non-to be concerned right the replacement system, thosewho get rid of the court to replace the non-right litigant according to the authority to make thelaw to refract is respects the litigant the main body status and the disposition right, is helpfulcomplete transits in our country’s civil action system from the authority principle to thelitigant principle. Therefore this article thought that has the necessity to replace the system tothe non-right litigant to conduct the special study, to launch the thorough analysis discussion.This article besides the introduction and the conclusion, the main text altogether dividesinto four parts:Part I: The non-right litigant replaces system’s theory background. This part is for thepurpose of through to launching the paper thesis non-right litigant to non-right litigantcorrelation theories combing to replace system’s discussion to prepare. At present thedomestic academic theorists replace the non-right litigant system’s connotation to define thatin the traditional replacement theory, advocated our country civil action system info shouldcleans up gradually former Soviet Union’s of legal regime and the legal thought carry-over,subsequently returns to logic has in strictly the theory tensity mainland legal system civilaction theory. The author thought that the non-right litigant replaces the system to use forreference refers to the mainland legal system Germany, Japan, Taiwan area to make the law.Part II: The non-right litigant replaces the system nature defining clearly. This part is forthe purpose of the most important question namely non-right litigant’s nature which definesclearly the non-right litigant to replace the system theory connotation. The main existence’stheory had sues the change to say; Sued it to withdraw the concurrently new prosecution to say; The special behavior said. Our country educational world replaces system’s inquisition tothe non-right litigant to be also to this system’s valid deliberation stage, the educational worldhas not given the enough attention regarding this system’s legal nature in the scientific theoryexplanation, as long as in fact must establishes the preinstall to this system’s importantdocument and the legal effect to this system’s nature orientation. The author replaces thenon-right litigant system’s nature localization to sue the subjective change.Part III: The non-right litigant replaces system’s important document and the legal effect.This part is for the purpose of discussing replaces the question which by the preceding textnon-right litigant how system’s legal nature immediate influence effective importantdocument and the legal effect does establish. Speaking of the important document, embarksfrom the horizontal vertical two aspects, may situation lattice which replaces the lawsuitCentral Africa right litigant, subsequently under the safeguard oversight different situation thenon-right litigant does not replace the important document the establishment. Crosswise is theangle which two parties opposes from the lawsuit structure, the important document which isrefers to the plaintiff to replace the important document which and the defendant replaces;Longitudinal is the angle which from one, second trial the litigant replaces, is refers to theimportant document which the first trial litigant replaces, the important document which thesecond trial litigant replaces. Speaking of the legal effect, from sues the subjective changeangle to outline the legal effect which the non-right litigant replaces, and from withdrawsfrom the litigant with following to receive the litigant two aspects to unfold the non-rightlitigant to replace system’s legal binding force specifically.Part IV: Our country introduces the non-right litigant to replace the system rationalityanalysis. This part is for the purpose of through replacing system’s argument and the appraisalanalysis to our country non-right litigants discusses our country to introduce the non-rightlitigant to replace system’s necessity. Our country theorists replaced system’s rationalargument its essence to the non-right litigant are replace the theory to the traditional non-rightlitigant the rational argument, the viewpoint may divide into the denial approximately tomediate definitely say two broad headings. Regardless of from judicial practice angle, thecivil action theory, or is again says from the civil action legislation angle, introduces one to be fair, has the operational new non-right litigant to replace the system is necessary is alsoreasonable.