Study On Allocation Of Burden Of Proof In Unjust Enrichment Proceedings

Unjust enrichment, it is to point to obtain benefits, without legal according to the fact of damage to others. On the basis of its connotation, the components of the unjust enrichment are: "one party benefits", "other", "benefit and damaged there is causality between", "there is no lawful basis". In a suit of unjust enrichment returned, the first three components in the apocryphal, the burden of proof shall be borne by the plaintiff, both theoretical and practical circles have no objection, but "no legal according to the requirements in the apocryphal, the burden of proof shall be borne by the party concerned, controversy has theoretical and practical circles for a long time. In this paper, through the choice of cases, in order to "no legal according to the requirement of how to distribute the burden of proof for clues, through the analysis of the distribution system of the burden of proof in our country, put" no legal according to the requirement in the current under the burden of proof allocation system, and model the burden of proof distribution outside of many theory point of view, in order to promote our country's unjust enrichment restitution of the lawsuit proof responsibility distribution system perfect.In this paper, the text into four chapters, the full text of more than twenty thousand words.The first chapter is the basic situation of the case. Through to the unjust enrichment case introduction, this chapter analyses the case of disputes, that is, the "no legal according to the requirement of unjust enrichment distribution of burden of proof. About the dispute focus, cases using the two sides are at different positions. And as you can see from the result of a final judgment, the court against the controversial focus, point of view is the same with the plaintiff. So the court whether this view is correct? "There is no legal according to the" elements of unjust enrichment of just should be how to allocate the burden of proof?The second chapter is the legal analysis of related problem. Analyze how unjust enrichment return the litigation of burden of proof allocation, must be based on the components of the unjust enrichment. Thus this chapter firstly introduces the meaning of unjust enrichment and physical elements. The burden of proof allocation is the premise and basis of the burden of proof, so this chapter secondly introduces the meaning of the burden of proof, object and apply the premise. Again, this chapter emphatically introduces several outside proof responsibility distribution theory, in order to can be obtained from the related theory of experience. Finally, unjust enrichment should return the litigation of burden of proof allocation should not be applicable rules of distribution of burden of proof in China? For this chapter also describes the distribution of the burden of proof rule.The third chapter is the analysis and conclusion to the case. By the second chapter related legal analysis of the problems, this chapter firstly in case the central plains the defendant made a theoretical analytic differences between the two sides respectively. Second, focus on cases of disputes, what the referee rules ruled the case should apply to? Case in court for the referee rules is correct? In this article, through the legal analysis on the problem of the second chapter related, gives his own humble opinion on the case.The fourth chapter is a case study of revelation. By analyzing the first three chapters, concerning the allocation of responsibilities to prove unjust enrichment proceedings, the paper establishes the basic position. However, today's unjust enrichment dispute has become increasingly complex, and then apply the old rules of adjudication can't fully resolve such disputes. Thus it first distinguishes between categories of unjust enrichment, and then were analyzed to demonstrate how my responsibilities. Through the unjust enrichment class discrimination, and draw the relevant burden of proof doctrine extraterritorial experience to improve our unjust enrichment proceedings the burden of proof distribution system.