Research On The Format Of Jurisdiction Agreement

The formalization and large-scale characteristics of format jurisdiction agreement provide important guarantee for mass production and consumption in modern society,especially in e-commerce contracts,it can bring into full play its significant advantages of reducing transaction cost and improving transaction efficiency.The wide application of formatted jurisdiction agreement depends on the urgent need of its real transaction,but there are more and more jurisdiction disputes.Article 31 of the Interpretation of Civil Procedure Law regulates the issue of formatted jurisdiction agreement in procedure,but because the trial of subject content can not be separated from the cooperation of relevant substantive law,there are many problems in actual operation,which need to be further improved.If some courts consider the unit to be within the scope of the consumer,others consider that the unit should not be included in the consumer's concept;some courts support professional counterfeiters as part of the consumer,while others consider that professional counterfeiters should not be included in the consumer's concept.Due to too many legal provisions in the trial of cases,different courts have different standards for finding reasonable ways in which reasonable ways are brought to the attention of consumers,which leads to the excessive discretion of judges and the common occurrence of different judgments in the same case.In order to solve the existing problems and fully realize the original intention of the system,this paper will adopt a variety of methods,such as normative analysis method,case analysis method and so on,through the detailed analysis of the causes of the problems,in order to clarify the shortcomings of the system,to provide a feasible way to improve the system.The confusion of consumer subject qualification is an important reason for its unclear extension,which is mainly manifested in two aspects:non-uniform subject qualification criteria and controversial behavior purpose judgment.The lack of the rule of reasonable way is the primary reason for the difference of the court's standard,which is reflected in the lack of legal regulation,the insufficient use of the regulation tool of the operator's prior prevention,and the abuse of the right of jurisdiction objection by the operator.Legislators over-slant to protect consumers resulting in invalid recognition of the subject only to consumers.The extension of consumers in Article 31 of the Interpretation of Civil Procedure Law is different from the extension of consumers in China's Law on Consumer Protection,and its extension should be smaller in order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers effectively.The reasonable way to bring to the attention of consumers should be refined from two aspects:form judgment and substantive judgment;to bring to the attention of consumers is the responsibility of operators,and the important provisions against consumers must be actively reminded to reach the standard of attention;In the process of hearing the jurisdiction objection,it is found that the jurisdiction agreement is invalid because the operator fails to bring the consumer's attention in a reasonable way,so the court may,based on the conclusion of the trial experience in many cases,issue judicial advice to the operator to correct it in the way of reminding,so as to achieve the purpose of formatting the jurisdiction agreement as effective as possible;the similarity of the format jurisdiction agreement cases is very high,which provides a good innate condition for the same case to be able to be awarded,so such cases should be dealt with through the Supreme People's Court issuing guiding cases or popularizing judgments in order to prevent the same case from being divided.Under certain conditions,the establishment subject should include the court and give the operator the corresponding remedy.Article 31 of the Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law stipulates that the consumer is the sole initiator of the invalidity of the formatted jurisdiction agreement,which is too absolute.Consideration should be given to how relief should be provided when the interests of the State and the public interest of society are infringed,and how relief should be given to situations that may cause serious imbalances in the interests of the operator and thus fall into a weak position,which explains the lack of corresponding remedies in this regard.The author extends the invalid starter to the court and gives some relief to the operator according to the principle of situation change.This practice does not affect the original intention of preferential consumer protection legislation,only because according to the needs of judicial practice,it is necessary to set the relief channels of this special situation,so the starting subject of confirming invalid should be expanded,and the corresponding relief channels should be given to the operator,leaving room for the law to be applied to solve such cases in the future.