The Fault Recognition In Third Party's Infringement Of Creditor's Rights

The phenomenon of third party's infringement of creditor's rights has broke the tradition of the relativity of debts.Since lots of countries have already established the system of third party's infringement of creditor's rights and many courts of China have adopted this theory,the research of this theory has been started by Chinese academia and obviously the rationality of this theory has gained wide acceptance.However,our research is still stuck on the certifying the rationality of the theory and can not go further because of the lack of deep research on detail rules.Among the conditions of torts,the fault has its specialty and is truly controversial at home and abroad.As for the fault,most of Chinese jurists declared that only the intentional interference can be deemed as torts and punished.That kind of opinion has also accepted by some courts but it is totally stern.The lawful debt won't be properly protected if the torts law neglects the tortious actions under the circumstances that the infringers can or should foresee the negative influence of its negligence.The issue of fault is the most valuable parts for research of third party's infringement of creditor's rights and this article will focus on this issue.The first chapter of this article summarizes and introduces the basic theory of third party's infringement of creditor's rights,including the conception,the structure of actions,the types of torts and the elements of torts.This part draws forth the main parts of this article through analyzing the basic issues of third party's infringement of creditor's rights.In the second chapter,the author tries to conclude and summarize the common issues and rules of this kind of cases in jurisdiction of China with statistics from the analysis of relative cases in Chinese jurisdiction.At the same time,this part also lists the problems in jurisdiction of third party's infringement of creditor's rights through the case research with analysis,including the stern requirement of knowledge,the distinction between intention and negligence and the requirement of malicious attitude.The core researching methodology of the third chapter is comparison mainly focusing on the interference with contracts rule of the U.S.,including the recognition of fault,the process of rule building and related controversies and the current customs of American courts.In this part,the author firstly summarizes the history of the interference with contracts rule with the introduction the process from formation,adoption in larger scope to the wide acceptance.Then the author attentively sorts out bunches of relative academic materials for this theory and tries to recur the present researching situation of the U.S.about the torts of negligence,malice,the knowledge of contracts,privileges and other issues.Also for the punitive damages,the author uses one single section to introduce the controversy of it in American jurisdiction focusing on the distinction between intention and negligence.The forth chapter is the most important one of this article.By the combination of the results of case study and comparison,draw out the conclusions of unified conception of fault,wider scope of knowledge and the introduction of privileges for scaping the overflow of obligations through reasoning and argument with responding the problems in jurisdiction and academia.In summary,the methodology of this article includes case study and comparison.For the lack of practicality and unified standard of the recognition of the fault in third party's infringement of creditor's rights,the author tries to introduce the objective and usable standard of the recognition of the fault to solve the problem with the reference of American jurisdiction and the combination of case law and living experiences.