The Joint Litigation Forms Of Multi-party Debts

The civil procedure law is designed based on the settlement of legal disputes between one to one subjects,and its provisions on the form of litigation between multiple subjects,such as the debt of the majority,are mainly concentrated in the system of joint litigation and third-party participation in litigation.The first paragraph of Article 55 of the Civil Procedure Law of China adopts the dichotomy to divide the joint action into two basic forms: necessary joint action and ordinary joint action.This way of division has existed at the beginning of the formulation of the Civil Procedure Law,and is still playing its role.However,with the increasing complexity of modern civil disputes,the negative problems,such as the single form and identification difficulties,have become increasingly prominent.While these negative problems perplex judicial practice,they also seriously affect the realization of the design purpose of the joint litigation system.Aiming at the problem of single form,the introduction of similar necessary joint litigation to fine classification of joint litigation types has been widely recognized in the theoretical and practical fields.However,no matter what kind of division method is adopted,the subject matter of litigation is the main standard.However,due to the ambiguity of the connotation of the object of action and the complexity and diversity of the parties’ claims,substantive rights and other realities,the sole standard of continuing to use the object of action as the boundary for the joint litigation form of the debt of the majority has gradually failed to meet the higher demand for the convergence of civil procedural law and substantive law in the era of civil code.The reason is that the object of action,as a concept of procedural law,has a strong attribute of substantive law,and the standard of the object of action is actually a standard of substantive law.Dividing the issue of litigation form with complex and diverse substantive law provisions as the standard will also shake the stability value orientation pursued by procedural law on this issue.In fact,after the separation of procedural law and substantive law,the dividing standard of the joint action form of majority debt should be shifted to the direction that conforms to the value orientation of procedural law.Although the allocation of the rights and obligations of the majority in the substantive law provides a static benchmark for the determination of the litigation form,it still requires the procedural law to guide the final formation of the litigation form through the measurement of broader interests.Through the observation of the three forms of joint litigation of majority debts,it can be found that the two necessities of "the necessity of joint participation in litigation" and "the necessity of unity determination" should be the key criteria for distinguishing the forms of joint litigation of majority debts based on the perspective of procedural law.Under the original standard of the object of action,the two necessities are unified and determined by the object of action.As the sole dividing standard of the subject matter of litigation,it is difficult to adapt to the reality of the diversity of the current forms of joint litigation of the majority,so it is necessary to directly observe the two necessities of "the necessity of joint participation in litigation" and "the necessity of unity determination",and clarify its connotation in order to explore another possible paradigm of dividing the forms of joint litigation of the majority.The judgment on the necessity of joint participation in litigation needs to focus on the relationship between substantive rights and obligations.The common standard of litigation object under the old substantive law can continue to play its role in the process of judging the necessity,but its application needs to be appropriately limited.In the case that the parties to the majority debt have the same litigation object and the litigation object can no longer be split,the parties involved in the case should have the necessity to participate in the litigation together.Whereas the extension of res judicata is of great significance to the identification of the "unity to determine the necessity" standard similar to the standard of necessary joint action.Under the circumstance that China’s current res judicata rules have not been constructed and the theory has not been fully prepared,the "necessity of unified determination" of similar necessary joint action can be judged by the pre determination effect of the pre determination facts.It is highly implicated in substantive law that the basic facts confirmed in litigation may be regarded as important facts that determine the outcome in other lawsuits,that is,it is "necessary to determine unity".