The Folk Lending Case Analysis Of Chen Xin V. Cotton Linen Co. And Ren Shuo

Private lending dispute is one of the most important and the most common civil and commercial cases. In recent years, with the development of private economy, private capital is abundant, the folk finance is increasingly active, our country folk lending disputes present a new round of high incidence trend, such cases presented the complexity of the increasingly prominent, the difficulty of the trial and properly resolve disputes contradiction is also increasing, the people’s court for the trial of cases involving private lending is faced with more and more challenges. The author cannot be deep into the theory to show the people’s court in private lending disputes encountered in all sorts of difficulties, hence a grassroots people’s court in Yueyang city in2013the folk lending case of Chen Xin v. Cotton Linen Co. and Ren Shuo as a research perspective, through analyzing the focus of controversy and induction trying not to show the court in the trial of such system, comprehensive private lending in the criminal disputes in general difficulties in processing, with divergent to observe court should have such folk lending dispute cases of general referee path and combined with the case of specific issues involved in the some perfect Suggestions are put forward.This paper proceeds with a real case, based on the case of contention, summarized and analysed, put forward the suggestions to solve the problem of the class, and promoted to general referee thinking of other similar cases. This paper mainly divided into three parts. The first part:review the case. From the case introduction, the claims of the parties, defense reason, evidence submitted by the parties and the court of facts and reasons and results, detailed thorough introduces the case. The second part:summarize the case issue, and analyzing legal issues surrounding the case. In this case there are three issues:one is the legal representative of foreign borrowing, and decide borrowers. The second is the case of whether the borrowing constitutes illegal fund-raising; The third is on the program how to deal with cross torture people. From jurisprudential surrounding the controversy focus analysis and comments, it is concluded that the best treatment. The third part: research conclusions. Based on the above analysis and summarize the focus of controversy, it is concluded that should speed up to set up normative documents in order to define the basic concept of informal lending and solve prominent problems in practice, properly handle torture people cross class folk lending dispute case, in order to research conclusion in realization of unification of legal effect and social effect.