On The Theory of Issue Preclusion Validity in Civil Litigation

KE Yang-you

Volume 23 Issue 3

Jul. 2021

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Article Navigation > Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition) > 2007 > 23(3): 59-64

KE Yang-you. On The Theory of Issue Preclusion Validity in Civil Litigation[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2007, 23(3): 59-64.

Citation:

KE Yang-you. On The Theory of Issue Preclusion Validity in Civil Litigation[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2007, 23(3): 59-64.

KE Yang-you. On The Theory of Issue Preclusion Validity in Civil Litigation[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2007, 23(3): 59-64.

Citation:

KE Yang-you. On The Theory of Issue Preclusion Validity in Civil Litigation[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2007, 23(3): 59-64.

PDF( 280 KB)

On The Theory of Issue Preclusion Validity in Civil Litigation

KE Yang-you

School of Political Law Hebei University, Baoding 071002, China

Received Date: 2007-03-28
Available Online: 2021-07-03

Abstract

Abstract

Issue preclusion validity is an effect in general use created in the former litigation court's judgement to the issue, which was once argued mainly by both parties in the former litigation, and was also tried and judged by the court, when the same issue as the main primarily settled question appears in the latter trial for the other claims. According to the role of the issue preclusion validity, the party in the latter litigation can't put forward the assertion and evidence that violates this judgement, and the latter court's judgement can't contradict it. Its theoretical basis is credit and fairness doctrine. It has important theoretical and practical function. China should bring in the theory of the issue preclusion validity.
- civil litigation,
- issue preclusion validity,
- Res judicata,
- litigation object

FullText(HTML)

References(0)

References

Relative Articles

[1]	SUN Chenxi. The Nature Orientation and Enlightenment of Primary-face Proof[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2025, 41(1): 51-60. doi: 10.19979/j.cnki.issn10082689.2023120018
[2]	QIAO Fang-e, WANG Facai. The “Trial Restraint Effect” of Civil Self-Admission from the Perspective of Argumentalism[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2023, 39(6): 789-797. doi: 10.19979/j.cnki.issn10082689.2022070071
[3]	RAN Bo. From the Perspective of “Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Litigation” Re-discussion on the Effect of Preclusion of the Self-admission System[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2021, 37(2): 177-185.
[4]	LIAO Li-huan. The Normative Structure of Preventive Environmental Public Interest Litigation: Taking Article 1 of “The Interpretation of Several Issues on the Application of Law to Civil Public Interest Litigation Cases” as the Center[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2021, 37(1): 66-73.
[5]	XIAO Jian-guo, HUANG Zhong-shun. On the Application of Statutory Undertaking in Multi-party Tort Liability System[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2012, 28(1): 120-126.
[6]	XIAO Jian-guo, CHEN Wen-tao. Study on Constructing Noncontentious Procedure of Realizing the Mortgage Right[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2011, 27(1): 50-54,72.
[7]	WU Ru-qiao. Division and Cooperation: Relationship between the Subject and Object in Civil Evidence-collecting Procedure[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2011, 27(3): 77-84,89.
[8]	XIAO Jian-guo, HUANG Zhong-shun. Research on Problems in the Application of Discretional Undertaking[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2009, 25(1): 54-62.
[9]	KE Yang-you, KONG Chun-chao. On the Attacking and Defending Methods in Civil Action——From the Perspective of Japanese Ordinary Civil Procedure[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2009, 25(4): 52-59,70.
[10]	KE Yang-you, WU Ying-qi. Research on the Litigant's Truthfulness Obligation in the Civil Procedure[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2005, 21(3): 26-32.
[11]	WANG Meng-fei. New study on the Object of Criminal Procedure[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2004, 20(3): 48-51.
[12]	LIAO Yong-an, ZHAO Xiao-wei. The Comparative Study of Civil Expense of Proceeding System between Japan and China[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2004, 20(2): 41-47.
[13]	XIAO Jian-guo. On the Nature and the Effect of Civil Enforcement[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2004, 20(4): 11-18.
[14]	MA Liu-ying. On Amelioration of the System of Civil Witness in China[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2004, 20(1): 87-90.
[15]	XIAO Jian-hua. The Construction of the System of Judicial Assistance between the Main Land and Taiwan[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2003, 19(1): 10-16.
[16]	SONG Xue-mei. Research on the Reform of the Civil Retrial Procedure in China[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2003, 19(4): 29-33.
[17]	LIU Xue-zai. An Analysis of Puzzle of Res Judicata in China[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2003, 19(3): 30-35.
[18]	MAO Ling. Research on the Civil jurisdiction system[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2002, 18(4): 26-32.
[19]	XIAO Jian-hua. Analysis of Subjectivity on Process of Judicial Provement[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2001, 17(2): 53-60.