When conducting litigation, there is a situation of repeated prosecution. Repeated prosecution is a lawsuit filed based on the same facts and reasons, or a lawsuit filed in two courts for the same case. Then, What are the regulations for the determination of repeated lawsuits? The following is the relevant information about repeated lawsuits that I have compiled. You are welcome to read it!

Relevant content of duplicate lawsuits’ defenses 1

According to the "Civil Litigation" Article 247 of the Interpretation of the Law of the People’s Republic of China, if a party files a lawsuit again during the course of the litigation or after the judgment takes effect, and the following conditions are met at the same time, it constitutes a repeated lawsuit:

1. The subsequent lawsuit and the previous lawsuit The parties are the same;

2. The subject matter of the subsequent lawsuit and the previous lawsuit are the same;

3. The claims of the subsequent lawsuit are the same as those of the previous lawsuit, or the claims of the subsequent lawsuit are substantially negated The result of the previous appeal.

1. The parties to the subsequent suit are the same as the previous suit

(1) Scope of “parties” [1]

1. The usual parties, that is, the plaintiff , defendant;

2. Litigation participants, including third parties with independent claims, and third parties without independent claims who conduct litigation independently;

3. Litigation A person in charge is a person who conducts litigation on behalf of others, such as a subrogator in Contract Law, a litigation representative in Civil Procedure Law, etc.

(2) The meaning of "same"

1. Whether the parties are the same has nothing to do with the status of the parties in the two lawsuits. As long as it is within the scope of the above-mentioned parties, it can be set aside Litigation status is compared directly.

2. “Identical” does not only mean that the parties are completely identical, it can also mean that the parties to the subsequent lawsuit are included in the parties to the previous lawsuit, but it cannot mean that the parties to the previous lawsuit are included in the subsequent lawsuit. among the parties.

For example, the former lawsuit is a dispute over the confirmation of shareholder qualifications filed by the actual shareholders. The plaintiff is the actual shareholder, the defendant is the company, and the third party is the nominal shareholder; the latter lawsuit is a dispute over the invalidity of the entrusted shareholding agreement filed by the nominal shareholders. The plaintiff is the nominal shareholder and the defendant is the actual shareholder.

It should be considered that the parties to the subsequent lawsuit are the same as the parties to the previous lawsuit.

2. The subject matter of the subsequent suit and the previous suit are the same

(1) The meaning of “subject matter”

1. Substantive law, including old entities The theory of law (theory of legal relations) and the new substantive law theory (theory of legal facts);

2. The theory of procedural law (the theory of new subject matter of litigation), including the one-limb theory and the two-limb theory;

3. The subject matter of the lawsuit is relative.

The current general theory and practice in our country: the old substantive law theory, that is, the rights and obligations or legal relationships of the parties in substantive law.

(2) The meaning of "same"

1. The rights and obligations of the subsequent lawsuit and the previous lawsuit are completely consistent in substantive law;

2. The rights and obligations of the parties to the lawsuit are preliminary issues in the previous lawsuit.

3. The claims of the subsequent lawsuit are the same as those of the previous lawsuit, or the claims of the subsequent lawsuit substantially negate the judgment result of the previous lawsuit

(1) The meaning of “same”

1. The claims of the subsequent lawsuit are completely consistent with the claims of the previous lawsuit, or are included in the claims of the previous lawsuit;

2. The claims of the subsequent lawsuit are included in the claims of the previous lawsuit.

3. The claims of the subsequent lawsuit are included in the preliminary issues of the previous lawsuit.

(2) The meaning of "negative"

1. The claim of the subsequent lawsuit is completely opposite to the claim of the previous lawsuit or a certain claim included in the previous lawsuit;

p>

2. The claim in the subsequent lawsuit essentially denies the claim contained in the previous lawsuit;

For example, the payment of benefits can be absorbed in the confirmation lawsuit, and the plaintiff in the previous lawsuit sues to require the defendant to bear the breach of contract after the contract is terminated. Liability, the defendant subsequently sued to confirm that the contract had not been terminated.

It should be considered that the claims of the subsequent lawsuit essentially negate the judgment of the previous lawsuit.

3. The claim of the subsequent lawsuit essentially denies the preliminary issue identified in the previous lawsuit;

For example, in the inheritance dispute, the previous lawsuit needs to confirm the establishment of the marriage relationship, and the subsequent lawsuit requires confirmation of the marriage. The relationship does not hold.

It should be considered that the claims of the subsequent lawsuit essentially negate the judgment of the previous lawsuit.

4. The claims in the subsequent lawsuit essentially deny the basic facts identified in the previous lawsuit.

For example, the plaintiff in the previous lawsuit filed a lawsuit demanding that the defendant bear liability for breach of contract after the contract was terminated. The court’s effective judgment found that the defendant did not breach the contract.

The plaintiff subsequently sued to confirm the termination of the contract.

After discussion by the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Court held that the previous lawsuit had determined that the defendant did not constitute a breach of contract, and the plaintiff sued to confirm the termination of the contract based on this fact. This constituted a repeated lawsuit and should be dismissed.

(Supreme People’s Court [2013] Minkangzi No. 61 Civil Ruling)

It should be noted that the understanding of “previous litigation result” can include “previous litigation result”. "Possible judgment results of the previous lawsuit", "Judgment results of the previous lawsuit that has not taken effect" and "Judgment results of the previous lawsuit that has taken effect".

The author believes that for the first two situations, it is only required that the subsequent litigation claims substantively negate "the possible judgment results of the previous lawsuit"; for the latter two situations, at least the subsequent litigation claims are required to substantively negate "The judgment result of the previous lawsuit has not taken effect", otherwise it may constitute a "suspension of the trial" situation.

Relevant content of duplicate litigation defense statement 2

Regulations on the cause of action of administrative litigation cases

Notice of the Supreme People's Court on regulating the cause of action of administrative cases

The Higher People's Courts of all provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities directly under the Central Government, and the Production and Construction Corps Branch of the Higher People's Court of the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region:

Since the implementation of the Administrative Litigation Law, the determination and expression of the causes of administrative cases in various local courts have been inconsistent, and some courts have We have actively explored this aspect and accumulated some experience.

In order to standardize the cause of action of administrative cases, in accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China and other laws and the characteristics of administrative cases, combined with the practical experience of administrative trials, the issues concerning the cause of action of administrative cases are hereby raised The following opinions are requested to be implemented by the people's courts at all levels on a trial basis:

1. Components and determination methods of the cause of action of administrative cases

The cause of action of administrative cases is divided into: cases of action and cases of omission , administrative compensation cases.

The determination method is as follows:

(1) The constituent elements and determination method of the cause of action of a similar case

The basic method of determining the cause of action of a similar case is to divide the case The categories are constructed with the scope of administrative management as "category" and the specific types of administrative actions as "category".

The structure of the cause of action should have the following two elements:

1. Scope of administrative management.

The scope of administrative management refers to the field in which administrative subjects manage administrative affairs on behalf of the state.

Taking the scope of administrative management as the first element of the cause of action for administrative cases, administrative cases are initially divided into administrative disputes such as "public security", "industrial and commercial", and "taxation", and are distinguished by category.

Under normal circumstances, the scope of administrative management is used as the first component of the cause of action. There is no need to break it down after classification. For example, customs, family planning, taxation, etc., are directly classified as "customs", "family planning", "Taxation" is the first component of the cause of action; for individual areas with a relatively broad scope of administrative management, such as public security administration, it can be subdivided into public security management, fire protection management, etc., and the specific management scope can be refined and decomposed into " "Public security", "firefighting", etc. are used as the first constituent elements.

Whether to decompose should be based on the actual situation of the case, and the principle of concise and clear expression should be used.

2. Specific types of administrative actions.

The second component of the cause of action is the type or nature of the specific administrative act, such as "administrative penalty", "administrative license", "administrative confirmation", etc.

The manifestations of specific administrative actions, such as fines, detention, etc. in administrative penalties, do not appear as constituent elements, but are replaced by "administrative penalties".

Based on the above two elements, the structure of the cause of action for administrative cases is: scope of management + specific types of administrative actions.

Taking a lawsuit against the administrative detention penalty imposed by the public security organ as an example, the cause of the case should be determined as: "Public Security Administrative Penalty."

"Public security" refers to the specific public security management within the scope of public security administration; "administrative punishment" refers to the type of specific administrative behavior, which does not need to be expressed in the specific form of punishment "detention".

Taking the Customs’ behavior of confiscating items traveling by water as an example, the cause of the case should be determined as “Customs administrative penalty.”

The scope of customs management is relatively narrow, and there is no need to further decompose it. “Customs” can be directly used as the first component.

(2) Components and determination methods of the cause of action of omission-type cases

In principle, the structure of the two constituent elements of the above-mentioned cases of omission-type cases still applies to the cause of action of omission-type cases , but must reflect the characteristics of such cases, the determination method is: use "litigation" as the first component of the cause of action of such cases; use the category of administrative subjects as the second component, such as "industrial and commercial administrative agencies ", "Customs", etc.; with failure to perform specific administrative duties or obligations as the third constituent element.

Take the case of the public security organ’s failure to perform its legal duty to protect personal rights as an example. The cause of the case was determined to be “litigation against the public security organ for failing to perform its legal duty to protect personal rights.”

What kind of duties are required to be performed in "performing... statutory duties" should be determined according to the specific circumstances of the case. For example, it can be specifically distinguished as "litigating XX (administrative subject) for not performing the protection of personal rights (property rights)" "Legal duties", "suing XX (administrative subject) for not performing administrative contract obligations", "suing XX (housing management agencies, etc.) for not performing statutory duties for registration", etc.

(3) The constituent elements and determination methods of administrative compensation cases

Administrative compensation cases are divided into two situations, namely filing administrative compensation together and filing administrative compensation separately.

For administrative compensation cases filed together, the phrase "and administrative compensation" can be added after the cause of action of the specific administrative act case being sued.

For example, "Industrial and commercial administrative registration and administrative compensation"; "Suing against the public security organs for failing to perform their statutory duties of protecting personal rights and administrative compensation", etc.

For cases where administrative compensation is filed separately, the method of determining the cause of action is: administrative management scope + administrative compensation.

Take as an example a separate lawsuit for administrative compensation filed by tax staff who caused casualties during law enforcement, such as "tax administrative compensation".

2. Scope of application and determination time of the cause of action

During the case filing review stage, the preliminary cause of action can be determined based on the prosecution of the parties.

During the trial stage, if it is found that the initially determined cause of action is inaccurate, the cause of closing the case should be determined based on the nature of the legal relationship determined after the trial.

Therefore, this provision applies to both the review and prosecution stage and the trial stage, but legal documents and file covers should be based on the reasons for closing the case.

3. Handling situations where it is difficult to determine the cause of action

When it is difficult to define the scope of administrative management and specific types of administrative actions and determine the cause of action, the cause of action can be determined as appropriate as an exception.

For example, if you sue the township government for some ultra vires administrative acts or omissions, it will be difficult to determine the scope of management and the type of administrative acts. In this case, you can use the term "township (town) government administrative "Processing", "litigating the township (town) government for failing to perform statutory duties or administrative obligations", etc. as the cause of the case.

When a case that does not fall within the scope of administrative litigation is ruled not to be accepted or the lawsuit is dismissed, the cause of the case can be determined by summarizing the parties' claims.

If there are any problems in the implementation of this notice by the people's courts at all levels, please summarize and report to our court in a timely manner.