A Study On The Reserve Or Abolishment Of Other Organizations After The Implemetnation Of The Civil Code

After the implementation of the Civil Code where the system structure of unincorporated organizations has been basically established,a unified three-level civil subject system has been constituted in the Chinese civil law.The emergence of the idea of unincorporated organizations makes the civil subject system more scientific and comprehensive.However,it also leads to the controversy about the reserve or abolishment of other organization with the existence of other similar legal concepts.The reserve or abolishment of the term should be decided by a comparison between other organization and unincorporated organizations.By comparing the origin and evolution of the two concepts,it can be found that although they are highly similar,they are disparate in nature.The legal concept other organizations has appeared earlier than unincorporated organizations,and the subject of procedural law deviates from the subject of substantive law after it was confirmed as the subject of civil action by the Law of Civil Procedure.In order to reduce the negative effects of this subject-type bias,other organizations actually carries some substantive law meanings before the emergence of unincorporated organizations,subsequently,the connotation of other organizations tends to be enlarged.After the implementation of the General Provisions of the Civil Law,unincorporated organizations,as the civil subject,has replaced other organizations in the substantive law,but the legal term of other organizations exists in some special civil laws,which leads to the confusion and conflicts between the two meanings.After the implementation of the Civil Code,a unified civil subject system has been established.Unincorporated organizations dominates the field of civil laws in an all-round way,and the functions of other organizations in the sense of substantive law are eliminated.In the current legal framework,it is necessary to investigate the reserve and abolishment of other organizations and its legal function.By analyzing the two concepts with the jurisprudential hermeneutic method which involves textual interpretation,system interpretation and historical interpretation,it can be found that the two are similar but not homogeneous.Because unincorporated organizations can not cover the functional significance and value of the legal concept of other organizations.From discussions on realistic needs,the theory on litigious right,the relationship between the substantive law and the procedural law,it can be concluded that other organizations should be reserved.Because conflicts at this stage cannot be resolved by an arbitrary removal of other organization but from these two following methods.On the one hand,the present laws should be examined from the perspective of Juristiche Dogmatic,which means to make good use of systems like judicial interpretation,case guidance,comparison of similar cases and the like to solve the current contradictions.On the other hand,the relationship between civil substantive law and procedural law should be dealt with rationally in terms of legislation,in order to construct the framework systems for both unincorporated organizations and other organizations.To sum up,the single mode of empowerment cannot cope with the intricate contradictions between unincorporated organizations and other organizations,which can only be solved by the confluent and collaborative construction between the civil substantive law and the civil procedure law.