On Determination Of Litigants In The Unreal Joint Obligation Lawsuit

The creditors of unreal joint obligation shall have the right to require one or several debtors to perform their obligations simultaneously or successively,because of the legal characteristics of unreal joint obligation.However,whether the creditor can simultaneously or successively charge all or part of the debtor in judicial practice.What is the attitude of the court in the event that the creditor has sued all or part of the debtor simultaneously or successively.Through the literature review,the author found that the courts in the trial adopted different ways to deal with it.This paper is a case study.The author analyzes the problems which exist in the first instance and second instance,and put forward relevant suggestions to solve the problems existing in determination of litigants of the unreal joint obligation.In addition to the introduction,there are four parts in this paper,which is more than27,000 words totally.Part one,firstly,the author introduce the basic situation of the case briefly.Then the author Sums up the controversial focus of the case that whether the creditor could charge several debtors as co defendant in a lawsuit and whether the creditor could re charge other debtor to make up for the loss.Whether the court should support its claims.Part two,the author analyzes the jurisprudence of related problems.The author mainly analyzes the determination of litigants of the unreal joint obligation from the perspective of substantive law and procedural law,the problems of the determination of litigants of the unreal joint obligation existing in the legislation and judicial practice,and the viewpoint of the theoretical circles that whether the creditor could charge several debtors as co defendant in a lawsuit and re charge other debtor.Part three,The author draws conclusions that according to the new theory of object of action the court should allow the creditor charge several debtors as co defendant.In addition,the unreal joint obligation is different from narrow-sense claim concurrence,so the court should allow the creditor re charge other debtor to make up for the loss.Part four,the author elaborates the research enlightenment of this paper and puts forward some useful suggestions to determine correct litigants of unreal joint obligation in judicial practice.