Research On Interpretation System Of Judges In Civil Procedure Law

Since 1990 s,the rapid development of our socialist market economy has not only promoted the steady progress of our country’s rule of law construction,but also objectively laid the foundation for the reform of judicial system centered on the reform of civil trial mode.Our litigation mode has gradually begun to transform from the super-authority doctrine which occupied the absolute mainstream position in the1990 s to the litigant-led litigation mode.In this context,how to coordinate the relationship between the judicial power of the court and the litigant’s right of action is an unavoidable important issue in the field of civil procedure law,and also a difficult problem in deepening the reform of the judicial system in our country.The judge’s interpretation system is the game between the judicial power of the court and the litigant’s right of action.In addition to the introduction and conclusion,this paper will discuss the interpretation system of judges from three aspects:The first part discuss the basic theory of the interpretation system of judges.Firstly,it summarizes the connotation and characteristics of the judge interpretationsystem,combs the current controversial views on the nature of the judge interpretation system in detail,and defines its nature as a compound type of rights and obligations through analysis and demonstration;secondly,it makes a detailed discussion and summary on the historical evolution of the judge interpretation system and its development at home and abroad from two dimensions of time and space.The different historical evolution and development trajectory of judge interpretation system in civil law system and common law system have discussed the enlightenment to our country.Thirdly,through the study of the legal basis of judge interpretation system,the relationship between judge interpretation and the principle of equality before the law and the right to a fair trial has been summarized and analyzed.Focusing on the basic theory of civil litigation,the author has discussed the purpose of judge interpretation and civil litigation,and the purpose of civil litigation.The relationship among debating doctrine,disposition doctrine shows the rationality and necessity of the system,and shows the important value of the judge interpretation system in the field of civil litigation.Finally,in order to better understand the essence of the judge interpretation system,the relationship between the judge interpretation and the litigation command power is analyzed.The second part is about the introduction and analysis of the current situation of the interpretation system of judges in China.Starting from the background of the construction of the judge interpretation system in China,this part combs and summarizes the development status of the interpretation system of judges in China from the perspectives of legislative practice and judicial practice,and combines the relevant experience and lessons from other countries to analyze the existing problems of the interpretation system of judges in China,such as the relative stagnation of theoretical research and the lack of structure.The defects of the system foundation,the low efficiency of the legal rank,the unclear scope of application,the lack of legal liability and effective relief means of the construction judge’s explanation are also discussed.The third part mainly focuses on how to improve the judge interpretation system in our country.This part takes the existing problems of the interpretation system of judges discussed in the second part as the logical origin,combines the characteristics and values of the interpretation system of judges in the first part,from improving the legislation of interpretation of judges,clarifying the boundaries of judge interpretation,determining the scope of interpretation of judges,perfecting the legal responsibility and relief mechanism of improper interpretation.Four points of view put forward a series of concrete suggestions on improving the interpretation system of judges in China.