On The Blocking Effect

The relationship between civil rights is in the process of continuous change and development.The decision made by the court can only be used to judge the legal relationship at a specific time.The specific time is the standard time.The court in the standard on the judgment then cannot be challenged and attack,crit resulting,the procedural guarantee and the self responsibility for the legitimate basis,legal consequence as in the previous case after full litigation by the court and judge the matter would no longer dispute,the parties shall put forward not put forward methods of attack and defense will be interrupted in the previous case,unless the standard after the emergence of new facts,or there is not attributable to the parties unable to look forward in the standard before the party.Pointing to the preclusion judgment on the effect of litigation,to prevent conflicts and promote the economy of litigation,judgment of the civil litigation purpose of benefit.But the current judicial practice deviates from the suspensive effect mechanism,the theory research of suspensive effect is not sufficient,it has practical value of preclusion theory hidden in the theory of res judicata,therefore it is necessary to analyze and Study on preclusion theory,eliminate the concrete application of the obstacles,so that it can fully guide the judicial practice.This paper is divided into five parts,the first part is based on the existing judicial practice and existing research,pointed out that the preclusion theory in practice and academic circles have received little attention,and try to blame for preclusion principle and the objective scope of res judicata is only limited to the conflict of the proposition of proper judgment;second part of the body for preclusion of the scope of res judicata time mining theory of continental law system,points out the suspensive effect caused by time scale theory,to no longer dispute and legal consequences,and stressed that no proof of complex dispute is completely different from the meaning of the law of evidence.Because no controversy is very severe.In traditional theory,it should be put forward before and after dividing the standard time point.It should not be put forward too mechanically.It may damage the procedural protection,so we need to adjust the identification of whether it is attributable to the litigants or not.This part also attempts to discuss the scope of preclusion,that to give the parties full procedural disputes range.The theory of the subject of litigation in the traditional continental law system has been unable to answer this question,and the dispute resolution theory of the Anglo American law system provides different solutions.The third part is the two legal theory of res judicata dialogue,first analyzes the point of contention between the exclusion effect and preclusion in common,two people share the same justification in procedural safeguards.On the second issue preclusion for effective carding and interpretation,including elements of dispute should include the same point of contention,is actually a lawsuit and the referee had to make a decision,it is necessary;the parties and interest constraining relation should be issue preclusion;use of non reciprocity principle,applicable restrictions but the need for aggressive claims;issue preclusion requires that the parties premise.Exclude the effect theory of learning based on the point of contention,the fourth part puts forward the specific rules of preclusion principle,in the objective conditions,the facts of the dispute is the same issue before and after the lawsuit,that after the proceedings and decisions on the facts before the decision action is necessary for judgment;in the main conditions,consistent with the subjective scope of res judicata;at the same time must be presented as the premise to apply.The fifth part is the practical value of suspensive effect principle,principle of suspensive effect especially on pretrial procedure and pre decision effectiveness rules for correct implementation of maintenance procedures and preclusion guarantee,must be improved on these two rules.The last part is the conclusion,pointing to the preclusion before litigation facts binding in the latter litigation,it would have been no reasons for judgment of res judicata proposition criticism,but in fact,the integration of theory of object of action is controversial,with the subject of litigation to determine the objective scope of res judicata is sustained by theory the challenge,our country civil procedure law judicial explanation 247th for judgment reason have binding force provides room for interpretation,this should not be the obstacle for preclusion.