An Empirical Analysis Of Falsely Defending The Defendant In Civil Litigation

Defending the defendant by evading jurisdiction is an improper act of circumventing the law.The plaintiff classifies outsiders who have no legal relationship as co-defendants,or confuses the status of a third party,or uses the domicile of the sub-legal person's residence as the junction point of jurisdiction to avoid adverse jurisdiction and choose favorable jurisdiction;and In this regard,the courts that originally had the right to lose their jurisdiction,but the courts that did not have the right to try.By analyzing the 893 judgment documents on the false listing of the defendant's evasion of jurisdiction obtained from the online search of the judgment documents,the five specific manifestations of the plaintiff's false listing of the defendant's evasion of jurisdiction are summarized,including the non-eligible defendant type and the marginal relationship,Lack of specific request type,no evidence proof type and wrong status type.The reasons for the frequent occurrence of false listings are mainly concentrated on two factors: one is driven by the interests of the parties themselves,and the other is the lack of relevant provisions at the legislative level and loopholes in the existing system.In view of the fact that the actor deliberately evades the lawful jurisdiction of the court,which may bring negative effects and adverse effects,and the court should deal with the weakness of the false defendant's evasion of the jurisdictional behavior,the system should be constructed.It provides an effective method for the court to effectively identify and stop the behavior,and to solve the difficult situation that is difficult to identify and handle.The legislative level should first classify the imaginary column behaviors,that is,to distinguish between tolerable imaginary column behaviors and those that must be blamed.Secondly,it clearly circumvents the legal status of the accused defendants and appropriately adjusts the special jurisdiction rules.At the judicial level,according to different stages of litigation,combining different types of imaginary defendants to evade jurisdictional behavior,design different response measures,and construct identification steps and processing methods.First,the appropriate limited identification at the filing stage.If the prosecutor does not have any specific claims against the defendant,or if the request is clearly unable to be supported,it is clear that the defendant made a false claim to avoid jurisdiction.Secondly,the identification after filing should gradually expand the scope and extent of the review.As long as it is related to the legal determination of jurisdiction,relevant substantive review should be conducted.Furthermore,at the stage of jurisdictional objection hearing,it is advisable to adopt a limited substantive examination model and,on the premise of fully considering the defendant's objection reason and the evidence provided,conduct a judgment on whether there is an evasive act of false listing.Finally,in substantive trials and trial supervision procedures,deliberate review is not advocated.If there is any doubt about the defendant's eligible status,it is necessary to conduct an investigation.The handling of this act should not only adopt the methods of ruling the case inadmissible,dismiss the prosecution,and directly transfer it in different procedures,but also punish the malicious parties by obstructing civil coercive measures.