On The Res Judicata Of Ruling

There is no doubt that objective scope of res judicata is connected with the subject matters confirmed. This notion is constantly insisted for the stability and unity of traditional theories of res judicata, also reflecting the prudence on theoretical renewal in civil law system.However, there are other ways to throw out or decide disputes other than judgment. Stick to the traditional notion may prevent res judicata from settling disputes and avoiding conflicts.Therefore, whether other forms of decision are effective in res judicata becomes a new research area on expanding of res judicata.In China, though lacking of similar rules of res judicata in representative countries and regions of civil law system, there is legal system of deterministic effect which has similar functions. Interestingly, the object of this system includes both judgment and ruling. But owing to fuzziness of legislation and conflict against traditional concept, the deterministic effect of ruling is restricted in judicial application. Whether ruling has deterministic effect?Little attention is paid to this question by our theoretical field as well as practical field, not to mention more following problems, such as the specific types of ruling, the legitimacy and considered standards. However, the answers to all questions above are closely related to study on the expanding of res judicata in decision forms. With inspiration from academic discussions on it, this paper seeks to find the method to perfect the system in our country,hoping to expand the dispute resolution of civil procedure through the system, while keep balance with procedural protection.This paper includes four parts except the introduction.Part one explains the traditional notion about the relationship between res judicata and decision forms. Traditionally, the discussion about res judicata is based on judgment of the case. With the help of theories used to define the scope of res judicata, namely essence theory and legitimacy theory, this part analyzes the reasons that traditional notion holds. Firstly, most of the matters judged in other decision forms are procedural, and they are not strictly related to dispute resolution, so there is no need of stability. Secondly, even though harassing procedural claims should be widely forbidden in civil procedure, it is suitable to regulate them with principle of honesty and credibility instead of res judicata.Part two introduces the expanding of res judicata in decision forms. With improvingdemand of dispute resolution by lawsuit system, debate on the problem that whether other decision forms have res judicata too arose in academia. And the involuntary dismissal as well as non-contentious ruling are specific forms mainly focused on. This part analyzes the res judicata of these two types, trying to find the theoretical foundation for the deterministic effect of ruling in China.Part three discusses present legislation and judicial interpretation about the res judicata of civil ruling in China and problems existing in judicial application. Firstly clarify the present legislation and judicial interpretation since they are fuzzy. Then from the present situation of the application, this part tries to reveal the problems in the legal norms and judicial application, such as what does the “ruling” specifically point? Whether the procedural protection is abundant? What are the considered standards?Part four seeks to find the ways to perfect China's legal system of deterministic effect in civil ruling. Basing on the relative reform trend of civil proceedings and the eager need of dispute resolution, this paper believes that involuntary dismissal should be the only ruling which necessarily and possibly have deterministic effect. Then focusing on procedural protection, this paper proposes suggestions on the operating condition and related institutions of the system. At last, this paper makes a brief analysis about the scope of deterministic effect of involuntary dismissal.