The fourteenth is to claim expanding interpretation, is about to the relevant organization for protection of civil rights shall effect with the interruption of prescription. The emphasis is put forward in accordance with the law, have the right to solve civil disputes division that interrupt effect
Article fifteenth the rights of people to the public security organs, people's Procuratorate, the people's court report or accusation, requests to protect the civil rights, the limitation of action from the date of report or accusation interrupt.
The authorities decided not to file the case, not to prosecute, the period of limitation of action from the right person knows or should know that not filing, revoke the case or not to prosecute the date of recalculation; criminal cases in the trial stage, the period of limitation of action re calculated from the date of Criminal Justice Wen Shusheng effect.
   Article fifteenth provisions of civil and criminal cases is to cross the interruption of the limitation, is the cross of civil and criminal cases is applicable terms. There are three cases in the cross of civil and criminal cases: one is the criminal police and civil litigation, criminal report in civil proceedings, aging has been interrupted, criminal report does not exist then interrupt problem. Two is reported and the civil procedure at the same time, the interruption of prescription. Three is the first criminal report, whether the limitation interrupt, this is this article main content. Positive attitude we take on this issue, the criminal report, we think the interrupt consequences of civil litigation. On the interruption point in time, should be equal to the litigation, litigant or report is the report date has the effect of interruption. Calculation of re starting point after the interruption, if not the case, filed after the withdrawal, decided not to prosecute, the starting point is the party should know the date has been made; if the criminal judgment, judgment of the date of entry into force is the point of interruption. On hearing the economic case ninth we made a correction, one of the most important revision is to re starting point by the withdrawal of the case or decided not to prosecute, to the right people know or should know the date, so that a more reasonable. Withdraw the report or report, and the withdrawal of the destiny is the same, that is not specified, this also is taken away, after the withdrawal provisions removed is a pity.

    Article sixteenth obligation to make installment, part performance, provides a guaranty, request for delay in performance, making of a debt repayment plan promises or behavior, should be identified as the general principles of the civil law stipulates that the 140th party "agreed obligations."

  Sixteenth is one of the parties agree to perform the obligation of interruption of prescription for expanding interpretation. We defined several situations, which we interpret as agreed to carry out obligations. Just a lawyer asked the case means aging after period or expiration of time limitation? This one's interpretation of article 140th, the period of limitation of action is to expand the interruption of prescription for interpretation, so it should be after the period of limitation of action.

    Article seventeenth for a joint and several creditors have effect of interruption of statute of limitations for, shall be determined to have the effect of interruption of statute of limitations on the other joint and several creditors.
For a joint debtors in the effect of interruption of statute of limitations for, shall be determined to have the effect of interruption of statute of limitations on the other joint debtors.

   We distinguish two cases here: one is the joint credit for discontinuation in it, the second is the joint and several liability for discontinuation in it, we take a positive view. In the joint credit, joint credit with external joint and internal sharing, any creditors claim payment or acceptance, can and other joint creditor. In the joint and several liability, we take a positive point of view, the joint and several liability is a single joint debt debt, all the responsibility on a single payment obligations due debts, the rights of any one obligor rights advocate, the effect of interruption of course and other debtors. The principal debtor and joint guarantee debt assume different properties, and the two are independent, the limitation is also different, suspension, interruption causes are different, so different from the general debt. If the debt is interrupted, we consider that the main debt is interrupted, the right people to the debtor's rights advocate, can be presumed that the principal creditor's right, from the debt belongs to the main debt, we consider the case in which is interrupted.

   Eighteenth where a creditor brings a suit of subrogation, should be identified for the creditors and the debtor's creditor's rights are effect of discontinuing the limitation of action

In this article adopted two claims at the same time interrupt point, subrogation of litigation if requested amount exceeds or is lower than the amount of claims, more debt part is interrupted? If creditors request amount in excess of secondary obligor shall assume the debt it, we think a interrupt. The secondary obligor as the third party to participate in the litigation, if the creditor has 1000000 only, the secondary obligor burden of 500000 debt, creditors filed 1000000 lawsuits, the court can only support 500000, but because the creditor has claimed 1000000 in the litigation rights, should think the interruption of prescription. But if the creditor is only 500000, the secondary obligor debt is 1000000, the creditor can only bring 500000 litigation request, to interrupt another 500000 is a prescription? In the foreign interpretation we think is interrupted. I personally think that may be the specific circumstances, such as in legal proceedings, as the third person of the debtor, the creditor is time, he did not advocate for the secondary debtor 500000 other rights, and the secondary debtor does not recognize the creditors' also bear 500000 of the debt, this case if also identified as interrupt, creditors 500000 claim based on that claims also interrupted, I personally feel that with the "general principles of civil law" is not consistent with the foreign legislative intent, now that constitutes at the same time interrupt.

    Article nineteenth assignment of creditor's right, the limitation of action shall be determined from the notice of assignment of rights to the debtor break date.
The debt assumption, which constitutes the original debtor's recognition of the debt, the limitation of action shall be determined from the debt burden means that interrupt arrival date of creditors.

   The nineteenth is the transfer of debt of the interruption of the limitation of the situation. First, transfer of creditor's rights. The dispute is whether to notify the creditor's rights transfer of course has the effect of interruption, the provisions of the present Provisions are only issued a notice of assignment of rights, creditor's rights transfer notice to the debtor will cause an interrupt. I personally think that the "contract law" stipulates that the eightieth assignment of creditor's right to notify the debtor, the provisions of this article is just a notification, tell he claims from a to B, if the notice to a claim on the expression means, I think some absolute, since it has been like this provides, in accordance with the provisions of the executive. Article twelfth the provisions of judicial interpretation is better, the notice of assignment of rights shall have the meaning representation, this statement is reasonable, with the "contract law" article eightieth of legislative intent is also quite good. Second, the debt. Must form the original debtor for debt admit, and meaning to human rights to constitute a interrupt. In debt to join the case, if the original debtor and the debt to join the party or the original debtor and creditors, the debt to join the three party have signed an agreement, with the consent of the creditor into the interrupt, this is no controversy, possible problems in where? The debt to join and creditors make a debt agreement, the debtor does not know, in this case can produce effect of interruption, we give a limited. Articles must be original debtor shall admit, creditor and debt to join the people signed the protocol can take, but agreed to the consent of the original debtor agree, otherwise it will aggravate the burden of the original obligor.

    Article twentieth in any of the following circumstances, should be identified as the general principles of the civil law the 139th regulation "other obstacles," litigation limitation suspension:
(a) the right infringed without person of civil action competence, person with limited capacity for civil conduct no statutory agent or legal representative, loss, death, loss of capacity of agent right;
(two) after the opening of succession successor has not been determined or heritage management;
(three) the right people are obligations or other control can not claim rights;
(four) other causes of human rights cannot claim the objective situation.

   This is a relatively simple to suspension explain other disorders cause. Third of them, can not claim rights, mainly refers to several situations: one is the relationship between representatives and represented between the obligation and the right people, right duty is the legal representative person situation; two is the right person is a subsidiary company of the duties of man; three is the right person to be compulsory or others limit, for personal freedom is unable to claim their rights; the four is between the obligor and obligee is care and custody of the.

The front suspension, interruption is related to the content, twenty-first, twenty-second is the aging rules of effectiveness.

The expiration of the period of limitation of action of twenty-first main debt, the guarantor has a statute of limitations as the primary debtor counterargument right.
The guarantor fails to assert the litigation right of defense, assume responsibility towards the principal debtor recourse, people's law

Court shall not support, unless the principal obligor agrees to pay.

The twenty-first is to ensure that people enjoy the provisions of principal limitation of the right of defense, often encountered in debt cases. Second, in 2001 there was a reply, the reply is the case, now extend to all cases.

    The expiration of the period of limitation of action in a twenty-second direction, the other party intention to consent to perform the obligation or voluntary obligations, but also to the expiration of the period of limitation of action on the grounds of defense, the people's court shall not support.

   The twenty-two is about voluntary performance give up defense litigation rights and obligations of the. On this issue, the 138th general principles of civil law and a series of reply has been specified.

    Twenty-third the provisions came into effect, the case is still in the first or second instance, applicable this regulation; prior to the enforcement of these provisions has been the case, the people's court for a retrial, the provisions do not apply.

Twenty-fourth the provisions before the promulgation of relevant judicial interpretation made by this court conflict with these Provisions, these Provisions shall prevail.

Article twenty-third, article twenty-four, is how to apply the.

   There is a very important issue has not been stipulated in front of the clause is invalid, application of contract litigation, is the practice need to solve the problem, but it is controversial in theory circle and practice circle big problem. There are many ways in the case of the process, but there is no provisions. On the invalid contract, we divided into two levels: the original provisions are stipulated, a request to confirm the contract null and void if the application of limitation of action after another; confirmed invalid contract, restitution of property, damages to the applicable procedural problems of aging. We believe that the right to request the contract does not belong to the category of the claim, confirming that the contract was invalid, should not apply the limitation of action, is the formation of the right. The key is to confirm the contract invalid after the return of property and right of compensation, we have two kinds of Views: one is the contract is confirmed invalid date; two is the contract expiration date. If the contract is null and void, to confirm the contract claim shall not apply the litigation validity. If the parties request compensation for the losses, the return of property, it can initiate invalid request right, then activate it back right, because the contract is invalid, can indefinitely. If the starting point for the contract expires, it will bring a what problem? Since the contract is invalid, how to perform the term of validity? The contract is null and void all terms, if only to fulfill effective period clause, it creates what confused? Invalid according to effective treatment. In order to solve these two views can not solve the problem, some comrades put forward a compromise viewpoint, in order to prevent the right to sleep, first from the contract is confirmed invalid date, if you return the property, claim compensation for losses in time if more than the contract performance period of two years, you worry about the right to sleep, I put these the right to give certain limit, let some rights can not sleep. We believe that this opinion is not desirable, equal to the accumulator in front of two kinds of drawbacks, because as long as the contract can be made at any time, invalid to him again after a certain time has no meaning, since the contract is invalid can always ask, can limit a part, such as the time limit for performance has been for the past ten years, I request the return of property at without protection, I personally think that this provision also does not have what meaning. In these views have been under dispute, we should report to the National People's Congress and special legal affairs office of the State Council, listen to their views. NPC Law Committee to give us the reply time only implicit out this problem, no answer, given the current situation, we have no provisions for this very important question.

   There is also the question of the right to rescind the contract, and there is no provision in it. Right of rescission is complex, forward contract is lifted, release date, or terminate occurs; backward lifting, time limit for performance in two cases, the time of performance, the starting point is the release date or terminate occurs, if the time of performance no session is full, release date, or the time of performance expiry date, considering that we have not specified. In fact, I personally feel that the termination of the contract, the contract is invalid, the contract revocation should belong to the same nature of the problem, but in the discussion of the process, the contract revocation became a fish escaped through the seine.

 Beijing lawyer Economic disputes lawyers Contract lawyer Beijing corporate counsel Enterprise legal adviser