On The Rule Of Collateral Estoppel

It is generally agreed by civil procedure theories and practices worldwide that final valid court judgments should have the effect to preclude further litigation on the decided claims. But different countries have different opinions about the effect of issues other than claims that are also decided in the judgment. Common law countries like the United States use the rule of collateral estoppel to give certain issues the effect to preclude further debates. Collateral estoppel plays an important role in saving judicial resource and preserving the finality and consistency of judgment. China has not established its own system concerning the effect of issues, and the academic field hopes to learn from successful foreign mechanisms. Considering the difficulty in transplanting a foreign system, we must start with a full understanding of it. This paper gives an introduction and analysis of the rule of collateral estoppel in the United States, examines the difficulties in law transplant and draws inspirations.This paper firstly introduces collateral estoppel as a legal concept, and ravels out other related legal concepts and doctrines. Then it illustrates the rule of collateral estoppel in terms of subject, essential issues for application, and classification. This paper focuses on the analysis of collateral estoppel with regard to its characteristics and relationship with certain common law doctrines and systems. Comparison is made between China and the United States in legal notions and procedural systems to dig into the possible difficulties in transplanting collateral estoppel. In the end, this paper puts forward suggestions for China based on the inspiration of collateral estoppel.The first chapter examines collateral estoppel against the frame of American civil procedure. It firstly introduces relative legal concepts such as res judicata, claim preclusion and direct estoppel. Then it analyses the relationship between collateral estoppel and other similar common law doctrines such as stare decisis.The second part includes three chapters from chapter two to chapter four. It comprehensively introduces the rule of collateral estoppel. The rule of collateral estoppel is to a large extent a product of case law, and has been through major changes over a long period of development. The second chapter discusses who can benefit from collateral estoppel and who are bound by it. The third chapter illustrates conditions of application and exceptions generally agreed by most American courts. The fourth chapter respectively discusses the application of offensive and defensive collateral estoppel.The fifth chapter gives an evaluation and analysis of collateral estoppel. It finds out that collateral estoppel preserves important interests like economy of justice and finality of judgment, but also brings problems such as unpredictability. It finds out that the rule of collateral estoppel aims to achieve compromise between efficiency and justice, and is a flexible rule based on the notion of procedural justice and discretionary right. On the issues affecting the establishment of this system, this paper finds out that the costly civil procedure, tradition of pursuing procedural justice, full and in-depth discovery of fact and the case law system all contribute to the rule of collateral estoppel.The sixth chapter mainly discusses the difficulties in transplanting collateral estoppel and evaluates the feasibility of transplanting collateral estoppel. Based on the analysis in chapter five, this chapter makes a comparison between China and the United States in terms of idea and procedural system, and reaches the conclusion that China is not ready to transplant collateral estoppel. This paper also points out the possible obstacles for law transplantation and puts forward suggestions for the establishment of China’s rule of issue effect.