Negative Confirmation Of The Lawsuit

As the quick development of market economy and the popularization of legal knowledge in our country, people's protection consciousness for wealth has been increasing and the ownership status of Intellectual property rights, all kinds of creditor's rights, property rights, etc. is increasingly complicated, which leads to more and more various rights disputes. Not only traditional lawsuits that consider obligee as the plaintiff largely increase, but also a new type pf lawsuits, the negative confirmation suit, that consider obligor as the plaintiff merge constantly. There are many disputes on the theory of the negative confirmation suit now in China:there are lack of relevant legislative provisions; there is no the certain standard on the conditions and procedures of the trail accepted, which to a large extent largely limited the wide use and further development of the negative confirmation suit in China. Above all, this article embarks from the analysis on the value of research of the negative confirmation suit, provides the basis for the good running of it by researching the litigant advantage, object of action, qualification for the proper party as well as burden of proof system,etc.This paper contains four parts except the introduction and conclusion:Part 1 Analysis of the negative value. This part uses the literature analysis method, starts with the concept of the Negative Confirmation Suits, points out that doctrine of public power is the theoretical basis to file the negative confirmation suit, through analyzing why the obligor who are no entity rights can take a legal action to the negative confirmation suit. Besides, by analyzing the negative confirmation suit's process value,justice value, and efficiency value, this part makes it clear that this type of lawsuit is.....For the litigants who are in a state of uncertain legal status. So, it is necessary to the study the theory of the negative confirmation suit.Part 2 The contend of the negative confirmation suit. This part makes anoverall analysis from the following four main aspects:interest of litigation, object of action, justification of parties, burden of proof. The interest of the lawsuit of the negative is the basis for the plaintiffs to have the right of appeal, and the plaintiffs legal status is really upset. Before the suit, parties make the full negotiation. So the only way to resolve disputes is standard to judge the interests of suit. The scope of object of court is decided by object of action, and the object of action considered as the negative confirmation suit must resolve the dispute directly and efficiently. The people with a legal interest with trial results are the eligible subject of the negative confirmation suit. Whether legal relationship is valid or not is the focus controversy of the negative. So it is the plaintiff who are obligated to bear the burden of proof of on the fact that legal relationship does not exist which was caused by the plaintiffs'obstruction, eliminating or destroying evidence according to Rosen beck's specification requirements, while the defendant should bear the burden of proof of on the fact that legal relationship does exist.Part 3 The common form of the negative confirmation suit. This part starts with people's real needs to the negative confirmation suit, confirm the suit of debt not exist in traffic accident field, the non-infringement action in intellectual property field, and clearly puts forward the legitimacy of these lawsuits. Combined its particularity, this part points out the required conditions to file the lawsuit. Especially for the complexity of the subject field of traffic accident, this part analyzes in detail for the suit of debt not exist caused by victims, medical Institutions, and insurance company, states that with more complicated social disputes, there will be more negative confirmation suits mentioned in other areas year by year.Part 4 Present situation and improvement of the negative confirmation suit. This part firstly analyzes the situation that it is running in our country from the aspect of civil procedure act, where there are no special regulations about the negative confirmation suit, and only are used in limitedfields, and then puts forward that special regulations on the negative confirmation suit should be set up to make it clear about the condition, scope, distribution of burden of proof as well as abusing litigious rights of the negative confirmation suit.