????
I. Introduction
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
In recent years, due to the continuous improvement of social economy and the rapid development of science and technology level, professional problems in civil litigation of our country a substantial increase, relates to the field of showing a complicated and diversified characteristics, and avoid the jurisdiction problem has become one of the more prominent aspects. Legal provisions was originally in order to standardize a social problem, should have the unity and certainty, and in fact system under the jurisdiction of the Civil Procedure Law of the people's Republic of China on the judgment standard is not unified, the provisions of the laws is flexible enough and to spare, and lack of rigidity, which resulted in the status in quo of the at present in China's judicial practice to avoid governing the behavior continue to breed, this phenomenon become an urgent problem in the modern litigation system. The avoidance of in-depth analysis of the present situation and the reasons of the problems in the jurisdiction in civil litigation, we can understand the harm caused by this behavior, starting from the problem to find out the effective countermeasures to solve this problem, and then effectively solve the judicial practice to circumvent the jurisdiction of the problem.
??????????????????????
Two, China's civil action to avoid the phenomenon of the existence of the reasons for the analysis
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
To determine the jurisdiction of a case is the first part of the civil procedure, whether the jurisdiction system has a great impact on the substantive rights of the parties, the main reason for the existence of the evasion of the jurisdiction has some.
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????“????”???????
First, loopholes in the existing jurisdiction system. The legislation provides the conditions are not perfect for those who want to drill legal loopholes, to avoid the possible behavior of jurisdiction. On the one hand, it is difficult to grasp the standard of jurisdiction. Take the level of jurisdiction of the criteria, almost every province has a set of their own criteria for judging the level of jurisdiction, which increased the complexity of the standard of jurisdiction, increased the difficulty of the criteria to determine the jurisdiction. For regional jurisdiction standards, the Supreme People's court through a variety of interpretation of its norms but the effect is not significant, the various provisions of inconsistent standards, mutual conflict. Jurisdiction rules, on the other hand, do not have rigidity. In our country, even if it violates the rules of jurisdiction, but also do not need to bear the corresponding procedures, the results, in terms of the jurisdiction rules is because of its lack of rigid leading jurisdiction rules become a mere scrap of paper, this also means that it can easily be violated. At the same time also contributed to an important reason for the chaotic situation of jurisdiction. Therefore, it can be said that the lack of rigidity of the jurisdiction is the result of "avoiding the jurisdiction" of the institutional obstacles.
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Second, the issue of judicial corruption. In recent years, China and frequent corruption cases, even under the high pressure of the anti-corruption policy still have many people to take risks, some will relatively weak judicial functionaries cannot afford the interests of the temptation, the hands of rights as profit for himself as a tool, and some speculative tricky for bartering. In judicial team, some professional quality and the ideological quality is not high on nepotism interfuse among them, individual government departments of the leadership and sometimes also by some administrative means of judicial interference, so that the judicial independence can not be, work can not be carried out. If the court is the last defense of social justice, so the judge is the keeper of the line. If the judges can not self-discipline, adhere to the defense of social justice, so to avoid the issue of jurisdiction will repeated.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????“??????”?????“??????”???????????????????????????????????????????????????????“??????”?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????“????????????????????????”.???????????????????????????????????
Third, the value of the individual interests of the parties to consider. First of all, the parties based on the consideration of the convenience and cost of litigation. Because of China's land area is too large, the parties to the different litigation and litigation costs in local is obviously not the same, so the case, the parties will consider the cost of litigation, it will induce the parties to choose to circumvent the jurisdiction. Secondly, the concept of "local protectionism" in the sense of justice or trial in the party's consciousness. Because the "local protectionism" is related to the success or failure of the problem, but also directly led to a lot of people want to be able to seek a local court to resolve conflicts and disputes. And there may not be such a "local protectionism" problem, although sometimes the parties will realize that this is only a possibility, but they will also try to avoid it. Finally, the negative evaluation of the overall credibility of the parties to the court system. The judicial practice of misuse law in adjudication, the referee unfair, the judiciary is not strict phenomenon seems to be not uncommon, which actually affect the parties to the people's court center trial, justice cases of hope and faith, the parties of the court system distrust are a direct result of its "for the interests of the individual concerns, and promote its leave no stone unturned to seek security on their own". And this often leads to the use jurisdiction avoidance means in order to achieve the goal of maximization of individual interests.
????????????????
Three, the harm caused by the jurisdiction of the civil action
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
First, the justice of the justice. If the court accepts the case to uniform filing standards, strictly examine the conditions of filing a case, uphold the principle of procedure justice philosophy of the trial of the case, then this in a certain extent is can contain various forms of evading jurisdiction behavior. But in judicial practice, the parties to the case by using a variety of methods to circumvent the jurisdiction of the court and flagrant defiance of the law, the practice is to judicial fairness and authority of a damage and provocation. In some cases to avoid jurisdiction, some of the court and the parties in the case of usurp case jurisdiction, which objectively serious damage to the judicial impartiality. In the judicial practice, to avoid the jurisdiction of the case will cause the actual situation and the court's trial is not suited to the power.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Second, it is detrimental to the interests of the parties. In a sense, our country civil action under the jurisdiction of the legislative intention is to meet the court accepted the case and to facilitate the parties of the litigation, but the legislative consideration just stay at a basic level. And from the perspective of the judge, jurisdiction and the parties and no much relationship, its just courts at all levels for some specific cases of the jurisdiction of the internal division of labor, so there is no need to give parties under the jurisdiction of the right, and in so doing can be reduced a lot of procedure so as to avoid delay in the proceedings. Therefore, in judicial practice, the vital interests of the parties to the case is not legal fully guaranteed, and some parties to the case using a loophole in the law to avoid the jurisdiction, is to bring the more or less damage to the interests of the other party. In judicial practice, these evasion of jurisdiction makes the legal rights of the parties are not effective maintenance and protection of the law, the legitimate interests of the parties will therefore be subject to some unnecessary damage.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Third, resulting in the waste of judicial resources. In civil proceedings, the parties use the loopholes in the legal system to circumvent the jurisdiction of the act, in fact, improve the cost of litigation, but also greatly reduce the efficiency of litigation. In judicial practice, there are many parties to the case through the change of the amount of the actual subject matter of litigation to circumvent the grade jurisdiction, but gets the jurisdiction in cases where the original jurisdiction of the court, for the parties to the case, not only do the consume a lot of time and energy in the course of the trial. It will also increase the additional litigation expenses. And from the point of view of the court, which will not only reduce the efficiency of the court handling the case, the court investigation and evidence collection, take conservatory measures in litigation activities will therefore added a lot of manpower and material resources, is actually a serious waste of judicial resources. Therefore, it is a waste of judicial resources to avoid the jurisdiction in the civil action in a sense.
????
Four, the conclusion
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
In our country, the research on the phenomenon of evasion of jurisdiction in civil procedure is not only the need of academic research, but also the need of our country's judicial practice. The jurisdiction system of civil procedure is a very important system in the Civil Procedure Law of our country, it is the primary value of the procedural justice, we should pay enough attention to it. The so-called litigation jurisdiction is the first door, only keep the doors in order to ensure follow-up of good order. Evasion of jurisdiction is an urgent problem to be solved, only to curb the phenomenon of avoidance of jurisdiction, to be able to rationalize the jurisdiction of civil proceedings in china. The system of civil litigation jurisdiction is to achieve a cornerstone of justice and orderly jurisdiction in order to create a judicial building, civil jurisdiction system is reasonable and lawful is a country to achieve the basic premise of the protection of the right of action, judicial justice and efficiency value. If the rule of law is not perfect, it will lead to the phenomenon of the proliferation of evasion of jurisdiction, and ultimately will affect the realization of procedural justice, so that the judicial authority is greatly reduced.
???????????????????????????????????????????????
Therefore, it is a subject that can not be avoided in the legal field to study how to avoid the jurisdiction problem and improve the jurisdiction system. It is also an important subject in the judicial reform of our country.
[ ? ? ? ? ]
[reference]
[1]??????? ???????????[M]. ??? ????????2012.
[1] Zhang Weiping, Li Hao. The principle and application of the new civil procedure law [M]. Beijing: People's court press, 2012
[2]???? ??????????[M]. ??? ??????????2008.
[2] Sun Bangqing. Research on the jurisdiction system of civil procedure [M]. Beijing: China University of Political Science and Law press, 2008
[3]??????? ????[M]. ??? ????????2005.
[3] Jiang Kai, Sun Bangqing. Litigation jurisdiction [M]. Beijing: Publishing House of the people's court, 2005
[4]???? ?????[M]. ??? ??????2004.
[4] Zhang Weiping. Civil procedure law [M]. Beijing: Law Press, 2004
[5]???? ????“????”????[J]. ?????2012? 01? .
[5] Wang Liqiang. Research on the phenomenon of "evasion of jurisdiction" in civil proceedings [J]. judicial forum, 2012 (01).
[6]???? ??????????[J]. ?????2011? 10? .
[6] Zhao Min. Jurisdiction is how to circumvent the [J]. theory of research, 2011 (10).