The Improvement Judgment By Civil Law Default Syestem In China

Judgment by default is conducted while one of the parties has been absent, which has gradually come into being in the long run and formed two judgment modes of default system ism and one party debating ism. Chinese code of civil law has rough rules of judgment by default with many disadvantages. The article has started with the origin of judgment by default system, analyzing the existing disadvantages of the judgment by default in China. It has also recommended taking steps to improve such system through the reference to the practice in foreign countries and regions.This article consists of four chapters.Chapter one (the summary of judgment by default) defines the code of civil law as private law, which has caused the possibility of judgment by default. The system has emerged since the"non-lawsuit procedure" period of ancient Roman, come into being in the long run and formed two judgment modes of default system ism and one party debating ism.Chapter two (the analysis of current status of the judgment by default in China) has introduced the rules of Chinese judgment by default in China code of civil law. It has analyzed the characters of judgment by default in China: separate rules for the absence of indicter and indictee, which has breached the principle of equal rights; the judgment by default has been seen as the punishment to the indictee; no plenty of contents for the default; luck of the legal documents etc. This has caused the mistakes during the legal practice: mistakes during the verification of the supporting evidence; absence at the court shall be regarded as the self confirmation of the default; role of the judge of the court.Chapter three (the comparison and reference of the judgment by default system in foreign countries and regions) has introduced the judgment by default system in America, UK, Germany, France, Japan and Chinese Taipei region, these countries or region have apply the default system or one party debating system, or both.Chapter four (the improvement of judgment by default system in China) has argued the leading application of one party debating system for the justice, code of civil law stableness and effectiveness in China, supported by default system. As for the structure organization, it has re-defined the default, in the event of that one party has not debated at the presence to the court, which has been included in the judgment by default. Equal rights to both indicter and indictee, in the event of the absence of the indicter, such appeal shall be objected. In the event of the absence of the indictee, the judgment by default shall apply. The debating rules shall be fully applied, adopting the restrict debating principle; the practice of the delivery of non-debating report and non-debating reporting during the court presence shall be seen as the losing of the debating right, which shall be regarded as the confirmation of indicter's argument; as for the case by the delivery of public notification, it shall be investigated by practical principles, the objection application system shall not be advocated.