The sole proprietorship enterprise litigation subject qualification of the case review --

[case]
Dongxia town Qingzhou City, the big Yin village committee.
The defendant Tian Hongju.
The Plaintiff alleged that: in 2000, the plaintiff and the defendant investment individual enterprises signed the lease contract a contract, housing and land leasing I told Wei, annual rental fee 7388 yuan, scheduled for January 1st of each year to pay, the lease period of three years. After the defendant only pay the rent 9488 yuan, still owe 12716 yuan, in the prosecution of former defendant has paid the rent, but the defendant has serious breach of contract. Therefore, the plaintiff in November 12, 2002 to the Shandong province Qingzhou City People's court, request the court to order the lifting of the lease contract and the defendant bear the cost of litigation.
The defendant in court said it was not a breach of contract, want to continue to perform the contract.
Trial.
Shandong province Qingzhou City People's court identified with the signing of a lease contract and the actual use of the leased property is Qingzhou Jufeng chemical machinery fittings factory, the factory is from Tian Hongju to invest in a sole proprietorship enterprise.
The court considered as investors of individual enterprises, the management behavior of individual behavior and enterprise managers should be strictly distinguished, the legal consequences arising from the above two kinds of behavior bear should also be different, as for the former, individual behavior borne by individuals according to the general principles of the civil law; legal representative of an enterprise as a legal person on it "people and other staff of the business activities, shall bear the civil liability of the accused person", as the representative of the business activities in the enterprise, the civil liability of the subject should be the sole proprietorship enterprise. Therefore, in this case, both sides in the lease contract the parties premise are the plaintiff and the defendant investment enterprise, the plaintiff only because of his behavior and the accused person as the subject of litigation, obviously is not the main grid. According to the provisions of the civil procedure law paragraph 108th second, two 00 two years ruled in December 16th:
Dismissed the plaintiff Dongxia town Qingzhou City, the prosecution villagers committee.
The ruling is served, the parties did not appeal within the statutory time limit. The ruling has taken legal effect.

Shandong province Qingzhou City People's courtWang XuetangYang Yuanzhen analysis:

In 1986 China promulgated the general principles of the civil law because of the limitation of the time on the legal status of individual proprietorship enterprises not to be defined, until "the people's Republic of China individual proprietorship enterprise law" after the entry into force of the law since January 1, 2000, to give the lawful seat of the sole proprietorship enterprise.
The law: the individual owned enterprises, set up in the territory of China means in accordance with this law, by a natural person property investment, investors of all individuals, individual property investors with its unlimited liability for corporate debt management entity. The state protects the individual proprietorship enterprise in accordance with the law of property and other lawful rights and interests. The business license of the sole proprietorship enterprise issue date, date of establishment of a sole proprietorship enterprise. In the business license a sole proprietorship enterprise, the investor shall not engage in business activities in the name of the sole proprietorship enterprise. A sole proprietorship enterprise property is insufficient to pay off the debt, the investor shall repay the debts with his other property.
Open the law all the individual proprietorship enterprise's independent status, can also clearly see that the legislator is the behavior and property of individual citizens to distinguish. This clearly tells the judiciary, the accused is not suitable standard is obviously.
In fact, the dispute is another case, namely the investors of individual enterprises to the individual as a plaintiff, sued the village owned enterprises property rights violations. The court also rejected the prosecution, but the reason is different. The court thought that according to the "Regulations" sole proprietorship enterprise law of the people's Republic of China, a sole proprietorship enterprise is established by a natural person to invest in China territory, property investors of all individuals, investors with its personal property on the entity unlimited liability for corporate debt. As investors of individual enterprises, the assets into the company, their personal assets and the assets of enterprise is the phase separation, otherwise the law there is no need for special provisions of the sole proprietorship enterprise. The implementation of the tort is the individual owned enterprises and, legally direct interest relationship and tort party is and only is a wholly-owned enterprises, and shall not be considered as a plaintiff individual investors. In other words, the person is not has a direct interest in the case of the citizen, the legal action in the case of actually replace exercise owned enterprises the right business entity, business behavior and personal behavior and enterprise managers should be a strict distinction, because the legal consequences arising from the above two behavior of the bear is different, as for the former, individual behavior borne by individuals according to the general principles of the civil law; legal representative "enterprise legal person to its people and other staff of the business activities, shall bear the civil liability of act of duty", as the individual enterprise legal representative, civil liability should be the main is the individual owned enterprises. The premise in tort law directly interested by the personal investment owned enterprises, the plaintiff for the legal act of the defendant owned enterprises as the main proceedings, obviously is not the main grid. According to the provisions of the Civil Procedure Law Article 108th paragraph 1, the court rejected the plaintiff's prosecution.
Careful analysis of court ruling, the case is a legal procedure to understand the problems, which should reject or ruling dismissed the action request.
In civil litigation, the prosecution dismissed and rejected the claim is the people's court according to law, the parties to appeal negative evaluation, in a certain sense, do not support belongs to the litigant request. The judicial process can be dissatisfied with the parties to the people's Court of first instance, once the parties shall take effect, the legal relationship of the controversial for the same reason proceedings. The prosecution dismissed and rejected the claim and shall not accept three constituted to prevent abuse either in civil litigation, protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties of the chain.
The general theory is that the main difference between them is that:
1, different application stage. The prosecution dismissed the case after the end of the trial is made, the people's court has not filed the case should not be applied to dismiss the lawsuit; dismissed the action request is in the hearing shall make substantive evaluation stage made.
2, different legal basis. To dismiss the lawsuit is based on procedural law; rejected the claim is based on the substantive law, including civilLaws and regulations.
3, different problems. To dismiss the lawsuit solution procedures, is the denial of the right to sue, dismissed the action request is to solve the problem of entity, the negative party wins the lawsuit right.
4, different legal effect. Although once takes legal effect, the two parties shall be the legal relation of the controversial for the same reason filed a lawsuit, but the former is relative, has the condition, such as not belonging to the people's court jurisdiction litigation prosecution was ruled inadmissible or rejected, the people's court parties can also have jurisdiction to prosecute; the latter is absolute, unconditional, the parties to a case shall not only the legal relationship between the dispute for the same reason to the appeal by the people's court, and shall not be charged to the other people's court. Even if there is an error in the judgment, also can according to the trial supervision procedure.
5, applicable to different legal instruments and the appeal period. The prosecution dismissed the appeal period are applicable rule, within 10 days as of the receipt of the order book; but rejected the claim is applicable to judgement, the appeal period is within 15 days of receipt of the written judgment.
In addition, the litigation fee and bear are different.
The Civil Procedure Law of China stipulates that the 112nd "people's court receives a statement of complaint or an oral complaint, upon examination, that meet the conditions of prosecution, shall be filed within seven days, and notify the party concerned; it does not meet the conditions of prosecution, shall decide within seven days will not be accepted". The Supreme People's Court on the application of "Civil Procedure Law of the people's Republic of China"Opinions on several problems of the provisions of article 139th" the prosecution does not meet the requirements for acceptance, the people's court shall rule to reject. After the case found that the prosecution does not meet the requirements for acceptance, the court rejected the prosecution". But the rejected the claim there is no systematic regulations, appeared only sporadically in the Supreme Court's judicial interpretation, but it has merged in lots of substantive law.
The people's court does not meet the statutory conditions of admissibility of prosecution, if known in the case before the review should be ruled inadmissible; if it is found after the file in the trial is reject. If the lawsuit, in the case of the end, that the plaintiff's claim legal relationship in the litigation in accordance with the law can not be supported by the court shall reject the claims.
This case the plaintiff no evidence to support their claims (the accused person default), so we think, judge dismissed the action request is more appropriate for.
In fact, "the prosecution dismissed or rejected the claim" the problem is we in the civil trial practice often asking and thinking, and entanglement between the procedure and entity processing shilly-shally, courts in the trial work of a case should be applied to reject, or shall be rejected the claim, dispute often. On the litigation subject qualification process and not according to the judicial practice, traditional practices, is "the plaintiff is not the main grid, the prosecution dismissed; the defendant is not the main grid, dismissed the action request". This approach is correct or not is questionable.
According to the law stipulates, "not accept" and "reject the prosecution" system design goal, to solve the fact is one thing, that is only to solve problems in the process of acceptance or registration, part of the end of the proceedings, is not entered into the trial stage, "dismiss" is the supplement to "inadmissible". On the other hand, must pass a substantial trial subject qualification in order to identify the problem, is still used to dismiss the lawsuit way of handling, it will cause the waste of judicial resources.
With the development of the times, many new types of litigation emerge in an endless stream, the court the plaintiff no evidence or the evidence is not sufficient to make judgments based on, that is a kind of "legal truth", which is not necessarily the "objective truth". At this time, the judicial practice is often dismissed the action request to end the lawsuit, this contradiction is created: take the decision to reject the claims, is in fact the premise that the plaintiff's litigation, judgment; however, according to the objective and right of action, the plaintiff's rights are not violated, the legal relationship between the defendant and the no, the plaintiff should not be "direct interest" in the case of the parties, is not a "proper" plaintiff. And the plaintiff did not suit should reject. Here is a case of two different treatment results for the situation, not only from the procedure to solve can also handle from the entity. In between the two, let justice lost in procedure and entity chaos inextricably bogged down in the mire. Also, please tell the original loan repayment, but no written evidence, according to the civil procedure law, filing can judge the non qualified plaintiff and probably will not be accepted, but if enter after hearing the confession? In this case, is to let the litigation in litigation or rejected? In practice, the general is to allow the prosecution to court, but, if the accused does not think, is to tell no evidence or the defendant is not suitable, fitting or the plaintiff is not suitable to make the judgment? Another example confirmation, would encounter the same problem.
We believe that the 108th definition for the qualification of the plaintiff, is a product of process conditions and substantive conditions combination. According to this definition, our country the law abandons the universal, can save judicial resources and reduce the "non legitimate parties to replace the" system of burden of parties (Xiao Jianhua: "the study of" China legal press, 2001 edition, page sixtieth), it is not reasonable. The purpose of civil litigation system, is to solve civil disputes, is the premise and the guarantee system program of the jurisdiction of civil substantive law can realize. Therefore, procedural law should only be prescribed litigation subject to litigation procedure, the plaintiff's petition exists, reason is established, all is the substantive law is to ascertain the problem. From another point of view, the plaintiff in civil law provisions for the protection of a according to lodge claim their rights, the lawsuit to its, have the interests of legal, but the actual have no claim rights exist, does not affect him as the proper parties of the lawsuit main body status, if not the trial of Cha Mingqi that the rights of man it should take action, for no reason or reasons not established rejected the claim, and shall not deny his action. Conversely, the original tell please protect is the interests of others, to oneself is of course no legal interest, non qualified parties, when the court rejected the prosecution. In the absence of entity law could be applied and proposed claim, in the prosecution that the plaintiff has the benefit of litigation, and would be able to get the Court acknowledged and effectiveness of the decision depends on the burden of proof, fact and the opposing sides in the process of the court, the court of conflict of interest depends on the social groups on behalf of the two sides the problem of how to balance and redistribution. This is justice to judge the problem, we have to face such a difficult choice in this case. Needs the legal and judicial interpretation of the supreme.