Civil litigation lawyers who often handle cases often encounter the problem of whether the written defense is consistent with the words of the agent when representing the defendant. Is there any difference between the content of the defense and the content of the power of attorney? Wait for questions. Some lawyers believe that defense is the abbreviation of proxy, and defense and proxy are the same thing.
When lawyers participate in court debates, they often hear the presiding judge say: the defendant argues and insists on defending? Some lawyers responded to the debate with the same opinions as the defense, and some lawyers replied to add some opinions to the debate.
So, are the contents of the defense and the proxy words the same? The answer is no.
First of all, the definitions of the two are different.
Civil defense refers to the documents that the defendant and the appellee defend and defend on the facts and reasons of prosecution or the request and reasons of appeal. It is a document corresponding to civil indictment and civil appeal.
Include two situations:
First, after the plaintiff sued the people's court of first instance, the defendant filed a defense against the civil complaint;
Second, after the case was tried by the people's court of first instance, one party refused to accept it and appealed, and the appellee pleaded against the appeal.
The term "agency" as mentioned in these Measures refers to the comprehensive agency opinions issued by the plaintiff and the defendant in the name of the client or submitted to the court after the trial in order to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the party represented.
It is not difficult to see from their definitions that the content of defense is obviously different from that of proxy.
Secondly, the contents of the two are different.
From the definition of civil defense and proxy, the content of defense is aimed at the content of plaintiff's complaint or appellant's appeal, as well as the opinions of consent or rebuttal put forward by defendant or appellee. The content of proxy words is to put forward comprehensive and comprehensive opinions on the viewpoints expounded in the whole case of first instance or second instance, and refute the opinions of plaintiff or appellant, including the contents of defense.
Third, the relationship between the two is the relationship between tolerance and being tolerated.
The content of proxy words includes the content of defense. The content of the defense is not the whole content of the proxy, but only a part.
Through the elaboration of the above contents, lawyers should pay attention to the difference between writing a defense and an agent's word when writing a defense or an appellee's civil lawsuit. You can't substitute the content of defense for the content of proxy words.
Argument 2
Respondent: Changji Tongli Passenger and Freight Transportation Co., Ltd.
Gu, Gao, Ma Zhanxiu and other motor vehicle traffic accidents with criminal incidental civil disputes, Fuyun County People's Court added the respondent as the defendant, and the reply is as follows:
1. The defendant is not a qualified defendant in this case. It is wrong for Fuyun County People's Court to add the respondent as the defendant in this case. The legal relationship in this case is chaotic, and the plaintiff's appeal is unclear.
There is a contractual relationship between the Respondent and Han Dejun and Gu Xiaolan, and the Respondent is not an infringer. The respondent believes that there is no legal basis for adding the respondent as the defendant in this case. Request the court to clarify the legal relationship (i.e. tort or contract) on which the defendant was added to this case; At the same time, the plaintiff is also required to clarify in court whether his claim requires the defendant to bear tort liability or contract liability.
After the court and the plaintiff made it clear, the respondent made the following defense.
Two, the plaintiff asked the defendant to bear the contract responsibility, and the court can not determine the legal relationship of the case, in the case of unknown cause, the trial procedure is illegal;
Third, put aside the procedural issues for the time being. As for the substantive part, the respondent in this case should not be liable for compensation, and there is no factual and legal basis for demanding compensation from the respondent. The specific reasons will be given in the court debate after the court makes it clear whether this case is an infringement case or a contract case.
I am here to convey
Fuyun county people's court
Respondents: