The Study Of The Exercise Of The Judge’s Authority In The Change Of Claim

Article 53 of Provisions of The Supreme People’s Court on Civil Litigation Evidence(2019 Amendment)has deleted "the judge shall inform the parties that they may change the claim",while Article 35 was regarded as the principle provision of the judge’s obligation to interpret the claim.The amendment does not diminish the value of one-time settlement of disputes.How can a judge exercise his authority to achieve the purpose of Article 53? It is the problem that this paper attempts to solve that the parties can apply for the change of claims independently,so as to achieve the purpose of thorough settlement of disputes in the same litigation procedure.This paper analyzes the problems existing in the legal norms from the legislative level,and based on current legislation,with the focus on Article53 in the existing framework,completes the construction of the exercise of the authority of judges in the change of claims.Through the judicial documents network,we search the cases and analyze the application in judicial practice.Through the case analysis,we find the problems existing in the application of Article 35 of the old,the amendment of Article 53 of the new and whether there are new problems.Based on this,we put forward the final improvement suggestions.The interpretation system originated from the civil law countries(regions).By studying the theories and law of Germany,Japan and Taiwan of China,this paper compares the similarities and differences between the theories,legislation and the exercise of the judge’s authority in the change of claim in China.When Germany and Japan are faced with the problem that the parties and judges have different opinions on the nature of the legal relationship or the validity of the civil act,due to the different identification standards of the object of action,the change of legal reasons or request reasons does not produce the effect of changing the object of action.Taiwan of China excludes this kind of situation in the legislation.When the parties and judge have different opinions on the nature of the legal relationship or the effectiveness of the civil act,the judges usually protect the parties’ right to know by exercising the obligation of legal point interpretation,so as to avoid from being attacked.