-
As to how to calculate the limitation period, the General Principles of Civil Law provide:"The statute of limitations period is calculated from the time when the right was known or should have been known. "It is generally held that when the guarantee is invalid, the starting point of the infringement of rights in time is the maturity date of the principal debt, so the starting point of the statute of limitations for compensation liability should be the maturity date of the principal debt. I have no objection to the deadline that the general theory thinks, but I do disagree with the reasons for the general theory for the following reasons:
According to the logic of the general reasoning, the creditor's security right existed before the maturity of the principal debt, so if the security was invalid at the time of signing the security contract, and the security right was infringed before the expiration, the starting point of the statute of limitations for liability should be the date of the signing of the contract. In fact, there is a big problem with the general reasoning, the invalidity of the security means that the security right did not exist from the beginning, so there is no infringement of the security right, which shows that the general principles of civil law cannot be used"The statute of limitations period is calculated from the time when the right was known or should have been known. "This law regulates the period of litigation for liability for invalidity of a guarantee. We know that the contract pursues the autonomy of the parties to the greatest extent, and the state and the law generally respect the true intentions of the parties, but because of the statutory reasons of property rights, the law sets many conditions for the effectiveness of the security relationship, and the social units often do not know about it, or they know it and pursue an agreement outside the litigation, or they violate the principle of good faith and often have no evidence to prove the violation of the principle of good faith, so the law sets up liability to make up for this hole. In other words, the liability for invalidity of the guarantee is a kind of liability directly stipulated by the law, and when examining the limitation period of the liability, it is necessary to start from the provisions of the law on the liability itself.
According to the nature of liability, there is liability first because there is a loss, and how can there be compensation without loss, but there is a question here, what does this loss refer to? In my view, this loss refers to the inability to exercise a security right after the maturity of the principal obligation, first of all, the main obligation is due, and secondly, the security right cannot be exercised, both of which must be present.
Therefore, after a knowing creditor signs and seals an invalid guarantee contract, the loss has not yet occurred, and the limitation period for compensation cannot be calculated, and the limitation period can only be calculated when the main debt is due and both conditions are met. Of course, the liability is generally in rem or right"The main debt cannot be exercised after it matures"What is the nature of the term, whether it can become a legal concept, needs further discussion, but it can be seen that this statement is the right to be established by an invalid guarantee contract, and it can solve the problem of liability for invalid guarantee.
-
The statute of limitations period for requesting protection of civil rights from the people's court is three years, and the statute of limitations period is calculated from the date on which the right holder knows or should have known that the rights have been harmed and that the obligor has been harmed. Where the law provides otherwise, follow those provisions. However, where more than 20 years have elapsed since the date on which the rights were infringed, the people's courts will not protect them; Where there are special circumstances, the people's court may decide to extend the extension on the basis of the right holder's application.
-
The statute of limitations period begins when the parties know that their rights have been infringed. In accordance with the provisions of national laws and regulations, the period for the elimination of civil rights in a lawsuit filed with a people's court for protection of civil rights is three years. The limitation period for suspected knowledge of litigation is calculated from the date on which the right holder knows or should know that the right has been damaged and the obligor.
Article 188 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China: The statute of limitations for requesting protection of civil rights from the people's courts is three years. Where the law provides otherwise, follow those provisions. The limitation period is calculated from the date on which the right holder knows or should know that the right has been damaged and the obligor.
Where the law provides otherwise, follow those provisions. However, if more than 20 years have elapsed since the date on which the rights were infringed, the people's courts will not grant protection, and where there are special circumstances, the people's courts may decide to extend the forfeiture of the rights holder on the basis of the right holder's application.
According to Articles 41, 42 and 43 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Enforcement of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China, the statute of limitations for administrative litigation should be divided into the following two types: First, the general statute of limitations. Where administrative organs fail to inform citizens, legal persons, or other organizations of their right to sue or the time limit for initiating litigation when taking specific administrative acts, the time limit for initiating litigation is calculated from the date on which the citizens, legal persons, or other organizations knew or should have known of the right to sue or the time limit for initiating litigation, but must not exceed 2 years from the date on which they knew or should have known the content of the specific administrative act. >>>More
Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the General Principles of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China (Provisional). >>>More
According to Article 138 of the General Principles of the Civil Law, "if the limitation period exceeds the statute of limitations, the parties shall not be subject to the limitation period if they voluntarily perform". Article 173 of the Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the General Principles of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the "Opinions") stipulates that "after the statute of limitations is interrupted due to the right holder's assertion of rights or the obligor's agreement to perform its obligations, and the obligee claims the rights again within the new statute of limitations period, or the obligor agrees to perform its obligations again, it may be deemed that the statute of limitations has been interrupted again". It can be concluded that the application of this provision is premised on the premise that the interruption of the statute of limitations occurs within the limitation period. >>>More
Legal analysis: the bankruptcy administrator has the right to exercise the debtor's right to defend against the statute of limitations, and in addition, the claims that exceed the statute of limitations are not bankruptcy claims in accordance with the law, and whether the declared claims exceed the statute of limitations is a statutory review matter for the administrator; As a result, the administrator usually does not recognize the creditor's claims beyond the statute of limitations as bankruptcy claims. >>>More
1. Administrative litigation refers to the right of citizens, legal persons or other organizations to file a lawsuit in the people's court in accordance with this Law if they believe that the specific administrative acts of an administrative organ or its staff infringe upon their lawful rights and interests. >>>More