Research On The Application Of Response Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction is a detailed issue in civil proceedings,however,jurisdiction is often an important issue affecting the process and outcome of the case in judicial practice.The application of the civil procedure law in 2012 and the subsequent Supreme People's Court on the application of the Civil Procedure Law of the people's Republic of China,promulgated by the Supreme People's court in 2015,has made a certain extent clear to the application of the jurisdiction in civil proceedings.However,there are still some deficiencies in the legislation and judicial practice of responding jurisdiction in our country at the present stage,and it is not long since the jurisdiction of responding takes effect in our country,at the same time,there is no rich experience in the domestic judicial practice for the problems that arise,which can be used for reference.As a result,it is necessary to learn from the legislation and implementation of the jurisdiction in different countries as well as regions,and combine the theoretical research opinions,so as to constantly improve it to play its due value.By putting forward this topic,the author comprehensively analyzes it to correct the deficiencies of response jurisdiction and puts forward relatively perfect suggestions,in order to contribute to the smooth implementation of China's response jurisdiction.This paper discusses the basic theories of response jurisdiction,such as the concept and nature of response jurisdiction,and on this basis highlighting the unique legislative value of response jurisdiction;the mode of presumptive consensual jurisdiction is more consistent with the current jurisdiction of our country,which is helpful to guide the court to respect the will of the parties.By analyzing the similarities,differences,advantages and disadvantages concerning the response jurisdiction of our country and abroad,it is concluded that the inevitable trend of the times for the system of responding jurisdiction is to add the court's obligation to inform;it is not should not blindly draw lessons from other countries' “tacit consent” mode of conducting the jurisdiction of responding to a lawsuit in terms of its application conditions;as to the scope of application of the jurisdiction of responding to a lawsuit,the party may claim that only property rights are at the disposal of the parties.If we want to follow the example of other countries to extend the scope of application of the response jurisdiction system to personal jurisdiction cases with part of the property rights and interests,we also need to consider carefully.Through in-depth analysis of the current situation about the application of China's response jurisdiction,it is clear that there are problems in its application at present,and systematic rectification of the disorder is carried out on the controversial points in which the theoretical circle has been discussing intensely,which lays the groundwork to further propose concrete and perfect measures.Pointing out the following problems that the criterion of “answer to suit” is not clear enough,the duty of informing the judge is missing,and the abuse of the jurisdiction of responding to suit exists,the paper also discusses the issue that whether the error correction procedures in the jurisdiction of responding to a lawsuit is necessary in terms of therelationship between the system of response jurisdiction and that of filing and examination.Finally,the author puts forward specific measures to improve the above issues and discussions,and proposes to clarify the form of reply and the time point when the response jurisdiction is established,and increase the obligation of informing the court.In view of the court and the plaintiff abuse of jurisdiction,the author puts forward specific solutions respectively to prevent abuse of jurisdiction not only for abuse of behavior to have a complete set of disciplinary measures,but also to sit on the principle of good faith.At the same time,the author argues that there is no compatibility between the system of filing and examining the civil procedure law and the jurisdiction of responding to suit,so as to clarify the priority effect of the legal jurisdiction to the jurisdiction of responding to suit,and the priority of jurisdiction of responding to the express agreement jurisdiction.There is no need to add the error correction procedure for the application or non-application of the constitutive elements of the response jurisdiction,but there is still a gap in the legislation of the violation of the level of jurisdiction and the application of the response jurisdiction in the exclusive jurisdiction,so the author suggests that consideration should be given to reserve the right of relief for it,in order to prevent the scope of application of response jurisdiction to expand wantonly,at the same time,ensure the response jurisdiction to play its due effectiveness.