The Nature Orientation And Rule Application Of Predetermination Effectiveness In My Country Civil Judgement

The rule of pre-determination effect has been applied for nearly 30 years,because the rule of pre-determination effect originated from the legislation of the former Soviet Union,but there is no such concept in the civil law system.As the judicial reform of my country’s civil procedure law moves closer to the civil law system,the dispute over the nature of the validity of the pre-determination has generated considerable controversy in the practical and theoretical circles.In practice,case judges often show different perspectives based on their own understanding of the clause.The reason for these problems is that the legislative expression is ambiguous,and the essence of this clause is that the legislator does not clarify the clause.The decision-making rule imposes a "responsibility" beyond itself.In theory,both the practical and theoretical circles try to reinterpret the predetermination effect from the perspective of the civil law system,and expound its theoretical basis.Among them,there are roughly three theories: one is the theory of res judgment and its related effects,which mainly equate the effect of preliminary judgment with res judgment;the other is the dispute effect theory of the common law system,which mainly emphasizes the difference between it and res judicata.The third is the theory of proof effect,which mainly discusses its effect from the perspective of evidence law.The author advocates that the effect of predetermination should be positioned as the "proof effect" in the law of evidence,which is more in line with the significance of the current Chinese laws and the trend of judicial reform in my country.In the future,my country should build a perfect res judgment system,so that the effect of pre-determination can be "returned" to res judgment.This paper is mainly divided into four parts.The first part mainly summarizes the legislative evolution of the predetermination effect in the past 30 years and the evaluation of the legislation by the theoretical circle,and lists some specific cases of different understandings of the predetermination effect in practice.Based on the above arrangement,the author pointed out some problems in the legislation and judiciary.The author believes that the repeated positioning of the rules of prejudgment effect in my country’s practical circles is mainly due to the excessive "expectation" of the prejudgment effect,and the intention is to make it play the role of res judicata.However,due to the fact that the theory is not solid enough and the pre-determination effect cannot be "competent",the current complicated situation appears.The second part is mainly to sort out the disputes in the theoretical circles on the nature of the validity of preliminary determination,namely res judicata,the exclusionary rule,proof effect and other effects.Both the res judgment theory and the dispute exclusion rule theory are different from the current legislative texts in our country,and their theories are not yet fully mature in our country’s legislation,so they are not suitable as the theoretical basis for the effectiveness of pre-determination.In the third part,the author mainly expounds and analyzes his own views in detail,discusses the effect of proof theory from the aspects of legislative interpretation,judicial reform direction,and practical needs,and expounds the feasibility of proof effect as the nature of pre-determination effect.The fourth part is based on the analysis of the third part,and expresses the scope of application and the way of influence of the rule of prejudgment effect in the judiciary on the basis of probative effect.In terms of the scope of applicable objects,the application of self-confessed facts and the facts confirmed in the mediation letter should be limited;in terms of the scope of subjects,the relationship between the parties in the former lawsuit and the parties in the latter lawsuit should be distinguished.