The Prohibition Of Repeated Prosecution Theory And Applicable Reasarch In Civil Litigation

Repeated prosecution is a common form of unlawful litigation.Such litigation can have many negative effects on society,such as the increase in litigation and the pressure on the court to hear cases,because repeated prosecutions have led to two conflicting judgments by the court.Based on the following objectives:to stabilize the state litigation order,reduce the burden on judicial organs,use judicial resources efficiently,and establish the judicial authority of the state.We should resolutely combat and prohibit repeated prosecutions.For the first time,the negative laws and regulations on repeated litigation in China appeared in the judicial interpretation of Civil procedure law in 2015,and made a relatively clear identification standard on whether or not it constitutes repeated litigation,which provided corresponding legal basis for effectively preventing the occurrence of repeated litigation.In the face of the complex,changeable and diversified pattern of repeated litigation in judicial practice,the judicial interpretation of a standard of repeated litigation recognition alone shows a heavy sense of powerlessness in the course of judicial practice application.The research on the phenomenon of repeated prosecution summarizes several problems that are often encountered at this stage:First,China does not have a systematic theoretical basis to support the prohibition of repeated prosecution.At this stage,Several major theories,such as the theory of res Judicata,the theory of the subject of litigation,the theory of litigation,and the theory of common points of contention,involving the prohibition of repeated prosecution,have rarely been mentioned in the research of individual theories in both the academic and practical circles in China.Let alone a theoretical system;Second,the provisions of the judicial interpretation provisions on the identification criteria for repeated prosecution are not reasonable.First,it is still to be studied whether the provisions meet the three identification criteria as the necessary elements to determine whether the repeated prosecution is reasonable.Secondly,whether the three identification standards can solve the problems that need to be dealt with successfully:in the course of judicial practice is also unpredictable.Finally,the role of the parties in the exercise of the power of disposition in judicial proceedings in which the application of the provision prohibits repeated prosecution;Third,there is no distinction in the treatment of repeated prosecutions,and there is no specific treatment for repeated prosecutions that occur at different stages and at different points in time.In addition,there is no corresponding supporting mechanism to protect the legislation.The treatment of the provisions of the judicial interpretation of the People's Prosecution Law in 2015 is only for the two stages of filing and accepting the case.At the same time,it is stipulated that the time period in which the repeated prosecution takes place is in the process of litigation or after the judgment takes effect,but it is not treated differently in the way it is handled.In institutional legislation,there is no supporting system to protect the application of legal provisions.Through the analysis of the current status of the prohibition of repeated prosecution in China,drawing on relevant theories and experiences from outside the country,the author puts forward corresponding suggestions,establishes a theoretical system suitable for China's National conditions,and adopts comprehensive legislation to refine the criteria for the identification of repeated lawsuits.The emergence of repeated lawsuits is effectively prohibited by corresponding legislative AIDS such as technical and disciplinary measures.