Empirical Analysis Of The Standard Of Judicial Cognizance Of Civil False Action

In recent years,the number of cases of civil false litigation has been on the rise in judicial practice.As a specific type of action of bad faith,it not only harms the order and stability of judicial order,but also encroaches on a large number of judicial resources,cause the social good faith and the legal system authority to fall into the vicious circle.There are still disputes on the research of false litigation in domestic academic circles,and there is no unified understanding on the constitutive requirements,types of cases,the distinction between similar concepts and the protection of related rights and interests.However,in judicial practice,the court has handled a large number of civil false litigation cases,which provides the possibility to solve the above-mentioned problems.Based on the judicial practice of civil false action,this paper makes an empirical analysis of civil false action cases with the help of case database,and tries to sum up the judicial cognizance standard of civil false action from the perspective of Judgment.Using Section 112 of the civil procedure as an index to search on the Internet,the cause of action is identified as a civil cause,and the trial procedure is identified as a retrial supervision procedure,there are 339 cases,126 of which are selected as the focus of this paper.Through the analysis of the sample cases,it is found that the judicial cognizance of the civil false action by the judicial organs mainly presents the following characteristics: First,from the perspective of the way to correct the false action,after the prosecution starts the retrial,the court finds that the elements of the false action mainly focus on the objective elements,while the court finds that the evidence of the subjective elements is the main emphasis of the application for retrial and revocation made by an outsider,the identification of constitutive requirements is different under different starting modes.Second,compared with the inherent advantages of the Public Authority,the standard of proof is higher and the burden of proof is unclear.Finally,the local courts show the Dynamic and conservative coexistence to the civil false lawsuit tort liability compensation.Although the judicial decisions provide guidance for the judicial determination of false litigation in the above-mentioned aspects,there is room for further discussion and improvement: first,malicious collusion is only the appearance of the act of false litigation,whether or not the false lawsuit damages others’ legal rights and interests,it will inevitably destroy the civil trial order,so in fact the judicial order is the main infringement object of the false lawsuit.Secondly,the third party’s standard of proof and the distribution of burden of proof can be adjusted properly based on the transformation of the constitutive elements of the false action.Finally,the establishment of a new type of tort liability system to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the third party outside the case.