Practical Misunderstandings in Concurrence of Claims and Regulatory Approaches
HU Si-bo1, ZHAO Zhi-chao2
1. Procedural Law Research Institute, China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing, 100088; 2. Law School of Renmin University of China, Beijing, 100872
Abstract：We have many problems in handling the concurrence of claims. Neither the “alternative litigation” nor “alternative elimination” model is feasible in practice. They go against the requirements of the disposition doctrine, hinder effective settlement of disputes at one time, conflict with the victim-centered norm, and contradict Article 247 of the Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law. From practical perspective, it is intended to present reasonable explanation to the relationship between competing claims. From the procedural perspective, it is intended to settle disputes at one time and to avoid double payment. On the issue of the relationship between claims, according to Article 186 of the civil code, it is only suitable to adopt the theory of free concurrence of claims or the theory of mutual influence of claims. Accordingly,it is only through the objective combination of litigation and partial adjustment of the concept of litigation object that we can work in line with the above two theories. To address the problems in practice, it is advisable to adopt either of the two approaches, one is “free competition of claim rights + objective combination of litigation”, and the other is “mutual influence of claim rights + partial adjustment of the concept of litigation object”. Both approaches are feasible and effective in resolving problems in concurrence of claims, avoiding negative consequences of “alternative litigation” and “alternative elimination” modes. Considering feasibility and regulation rationality, the former can be taken as a short-term goal and the latter can be taken as the direction of judicial practice in the future.
2022, Vol. 39 
粤公网安备44030502007936号