Program flaws and procedures Stable value options

The Supreme People's Court's "Guidance and Reference of Civil Trial" (Copper 76) published the "Society of Commercial Company Correctional Cases of Lease Contracts for a Battery Company", which mainly discusses: After the first -instance civil judgment of the first instance on August 20, 2016 [(2015) Corridor No. 760], the business company did not accept it and appealed in the Langfang Intermediate People's Court of Hebei Province. The court made on November 29, 2016 Civil ruling [(2016) Ji 10 People's No. 3935]: The first trial judgment was canceled and the hospital was tried. On February 15, 2017, the hospital made a civil judgment [(2016) Ji 10 of the People's Republic of China No. 280]. The battery company refused to accept it and filed an appeal to the High People's Court of Hebei Province. The court made a second trial judgment on June 2, 2017 [(2017) Jimin No. 349]. The battery company is still dissatisfied and applied to the Supreme People's Court for retrial.

One of the re -examination of the battery company's application is that the trial ruling made by the Langfang Intermediate People's Court of Hebei Province violated the "Civil Procedure Law" (amended in 2012, the same below). It should be corrected. The Supreme People's Court re -reviewed that the revocation of the first trial judgment and the trial of the trial. Although there were flaws in the procedure, it did not damage the litigation rights and review benefits of the parties. "Article 200 (currently Article 207 of the Civil Procedure Law) stipulates the reasons for retrial, so it will not be supported by the re -trial claim of the battery company.

The program "defect" may not be re -trial

As a guiding case, the case involves two procedures: one is that in civil lawsuits, the court of second instance revoked the first instance judgment and the trial has a legal basis. The other is whether the trial lacks legal basis and whether it belongs to the deserved trial. The point of view of the Supreme People's Court is that although the second instance court revoked the first instance judgment and had no legal basis, there were flaws in the procedure, but it was not a situation that should be retrial.

In view of the conclusion of the Supreme People's Court, it will have a general guidance significance for the trial of courts at all levels in the country. It further explained the main reasons of the Supreme People's Court in the above case: rearing that the jurisdiction did not harm the litigation rights and trial interests of the parties, and gave the parties to obtain the right and opportunities of high levels of trials, which is conducive to preventing localities from preventing localities from preventing localities. Protection and unified referee scale.

This guiding case has a positive guiding effect on how the parties understand the procedural defects and procedure illegal matters, and have positive significance for the people's courts at all levels in maintaining the party's trial interests. Starting from the specific situation of this case, the Supreme People's Court has a legal perspective of the period of jurisdiction over jurisdiction in civil lawsuits, Article 179, paragraph 7 of the Civil Procedure Law (Article 207 of the current Civil Procedure Law) At the same time, Fuwen discussed the reason why the Supreme People's Court did not correct the reasons for the Langfang Municipal People's Court on the two aspects of the parties' litigation rights and trial interests. The author basically agreed. In addition, it is also important to review it from the aspect of the stability of the procedure and the legitimacy of the people's court to exercise trial rights.

The stable value of the program

First, the higher courts have made the subordinates' trial of the first trial of the subordinate courts have no legal basis, but the legislative and judicial interpretations have not made restrictions on this "upper tube" situation. If you do not restrict the trial at all, I am afraid that there is a intention to violate the legislation and judicial interpretation. In judicial practice, if the review of the higher court in the court, we only do not violate the laws and regulations for the trial. The reasons such as the level of the level and the higher level of judgment, overcoming the local protectionism, etc. to affirm the practices of some courts, especially in the form of guiding cases. "the behavior of. This is easy to lead to the chaos of the legal principles of the level jurisdiction in this statutory principle in judicial practice. In view of this, although the trial of the higher court does not violate the provisions of the civil procedure law, in some cases When exercising the right to judge the right, the provisions of the current law adopt a relatively humble attitude to ensure that the party's trial interest is not harmed.

Second, there are no restrictions on the upper and lower pipes (the trial of the higher court), the legal and judicial interpretation, and there are two considerations of the upper court of the court: one is that the rearrassment gives the parties to the parties to obtain a higher level of trial rights and opportunities for opportunities and opportunities to obtain high levels of trials. The second is to prevent local protection, and it is also conducive to the unity of the referee scale. Therefore, the trial jurisdiction of the Langfang Intermediate People's Court has not harmed the parties' litigation rights and trial interests. This view can be logically consistent, and theoretically, it is actually a legitimacy problem for court program selection. Starting from the theory of litigation interests, the evaluation of the adaptability of the people's court's trial rights cannot be surpassed, that is, the legitimacy of the court's program selection. In civil litigation procedures, the process of the court's decision is essentially the process of legal use. In the process, first of all, the court's trial behavior cannot illegally; secondly, the court's trial behavior should be legitimate. Because in a considerable situation, how to reflect the independence of the court as a referee, so that the judge's free tailoring cannot be separated from the pursuit of the value of procedural justice. It is also difficult to obtain people's trust. The upper -level court mentioned by Fuwen's upper -level court has not damaged the parties 'litigation rights and trial interests without legal basis. On the contrary, the trial of the superior may also benefit the parties' litigation rights and review interests. This Starting from the legitimacy of the court's program, the Supreme People's Court affirmed the program choice of the Langfang Intermediate People's Court. In addition, the view of the Supreme People's Court may further consider the stability of the program. Therefore, there is no need to correct the jurisdiction of the Langfang Intermediate People's Court. Third, in addition to justice and benefits, the value system of civil lawsuits should also include the stable value of the program, that is, the stability of the program and the stability of the program operation. The most important factor is the end of the program and the legal nature of the program. Japanese scholar chapters pointed out that the procedure law will undoubted the results of maintenance and implementation of the judgment, and the stability requirements of the conformity law should be used as a major feature. Professor Ji Weidong believes that the parties can report arbitrarily, and the superior authorities can be replaced at any time, so that the decision becomes extremely unresolved, and it is difficult to determine the legal relationship. It can be seen that "procedural stability" is not a fresh concept in the lawsuit scholar of the mainland law. Chen Guiming and Li Shichun further pointed out that procedural stability is the basic value orientation of the lawsuit system. The stability or order of the law itself should be preferred by the justice and efficiency of the law. The stability value of the procedure is reflected in the field of civil lawsuits, which includes the principle of responding to the jurisdiction and the constant jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of the response means that as long as there is no exclusive jurisdiction regulations in the first trial, even if there is no exclusive jurisdiction, and even if it is violated by the jurisdiction, if the defendant does not file an objection, In response to this case, this is equivalent to acknowledging acceptance of the court's trial. Like the agreement, the court can exercise jurisdiction. This is the reflection of the stability of the program in the civil lawsuit.

Proper program selection

Based on the stability of procedures, once the effective judgment and ruling are made, they have both judgment on the parties and the people's courts. Unless the situation stipulated in the law cannot be re -tried and changed. The judgment of the organs' effectiveness maintains a high degree of security trust. Specifically in this case, because the Langfang Municipal Intermediate People's Court filed a trial, the battery company did not raise any objections on jurisdiction. Instead, he participated in the trial of the first and second trials. The error requires the retrial. In addition to the Supreme People's Court considering that the re -trial is not required by the Civil Procedure Law, it is not appropriate to re -hear the case from the stability of the judgment. In short, the instruction cases issued by the Supreme People's Court and the interpretation of the People's Court of the Supreme People's Court are in line with the spirit of legislative spirit and civil lawsuit. Based on this, the author has made further theoretical explanations. If there is no law, the stability value of the law and the legitimacy of the people's court's power should be re -trial under the situation of re -review and the legitimacy of the people's court power. It is a proper procedure choice.

(Author Unit: Institute of Law of the Academy of Social Sciences)

Source: China Social Science Network-Journal of Social Sciences of China

Author: Yu Haisheng

- END -