Re-examination Case | Brief Description of the Court's Authority to Initiate Re-examination Procedures
Published:
2024-11-27
In the chapter on the supervision of trials in the "Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China," two ways to initiate a retrial procedure are clearly stipulated: the application for retrial by the parties involved and the initiation of a retrial by the people's court ex officio. In practice, the method of initiating a retrial by the people's court ex officio is commonly referred to as "discovered by the president of the court." Depending on the subject that initiates the retrial, there are two different scenarios: one is when the court itself decides to conduct a retrial, and the other is when the Supreme People's Court or a higher-level people's court decides to conduct a retrial. The court's ex officio retrial is essentially a form of self-supervision by the court over the case. The author, in conjunction with the relevant cases handled, will analyze and clarify the procedures and conditions for initiating such retrials.
The chapter on trial supervision procedures in the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China clearly stipulates two ways to initiate a retrial procedure: the party's application for retrial and the people's court's initiation of retrial ex officio. In practice, the people's court's initiation of retrial ex officio is commonly referred to as 'discovered by the president,' which varies depending on the subject initiating the retrial. One is the court's decision to retrial, and the other is the Supreme People's Court and higher-level people's courts' decision to retrial. The court's ex officio retrial is, in fact, the court's self-supervision of the case. The author, in conjunction with the relevant cases handled, will analyze and sort out the initiation procedures and conditions for everyone.
1. Which level of court president can initiate the retrial procedure
Article 209 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China states: 'The presidents of people's courts at all levels shall submit to the judicial committee for discussion and decision if they find that there are indeed errors in the legally effective judgments, rulings, and mediation documents of their own court and believe that a retrial is necessary. The Supreme People's Court has the right to review or instruct lower-level people's courts to retrial if it finds that there are indeed errors in the legally effective judgments, rulings, and mediation documents of local people's courts at all levels, and higher-level people's courts have the right to review or instruct lower-level people's courts to retrial if they find that there are indeed errors in the legally effective judgments, rulings, and mediation documents of lower-level people's courts.' Accordingly, we distinguish the people's court's ex officio initiation of retrial into the court's decision to retrial, the Supreme People's Court's decision to retrial, and the higher-level people's court's decision to retrial.
2. Conditions for the president to discover and initiate a retrial
First, the object of the court's ex officio initiation of retrial is a civil judgment, ruling, or mediation document that has already taken legal effect. For judgments or rulings that have not yet taken legal effect but are indeed erroneous, an appeal procedure should be sought for correction.
Second, the original judgment, ruling, or mediation document is indeed erroneous. This differs from the standards for parties applying for retrial and the procuratorial organs' appeal for retrial. The ex officio retrial does not need to follow the established grounds for retrial; it only requires the people's court to review and find that the original judgment or ruling is indeed erroneous. In the ex officio initiation of retrial, the standard of 'indeed erroneous' should be close to or approximately equal to the standard for retrial modification.
Third, the initiation must be submitted by the presidents of people's courts at all levels to the judicial committee. In conjunction with Article 209 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the ex officio initiation of retrial includes the following three layers of meaning: (1) The presidents of people's courts at all levels shall submit to the judicial committee for discussion and decision if they find that there are indeed errors in the legally effective judgments, rulings, and mediation documents of their own court and believe that a retrial is necessary. The discussion and decision by the judicial committee of the court on whether to retrial reflects the democratic centralism in the retrial procedure. (2) The Supreme People's Court has the right to review or instruct lower-level people's courts to retrial if it finds that there are indeed errors in the legally effective judgments, rulings, and mediation documents of local people's courts at all levels. The Supreme People's Court is the highest judicial organ in our country and has the right to supervise the trial work of local people's courts at all levels. (3) Higher-level people's courts have the right to review or instruct lower-level people's courts to retrial if they find that there are indeed errors in the legally effective judgments, rulings, and mediation documents of lower-level people's courts, and higher-level people's courts have the right to supervise the trial work of lower-level people's courts.
3. Sources of cases discovered by the president to initiate retrial
In judicial practice, the parties' petitions and complaints about cases are the main and direct sources for the president's discovery. After strict review, if the people's court believes that there are indeed errors in the cases of petitions and complaints, it can initiate a retrial ex officio in accordance with Article 209 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China. Generally speaking, petitions and complaints have an administrative nature, and the court's ex officio retrial reflects internal self-supervision, which differs from the parties' application for retrial. The application for retrial is a procedural right that the parties possess, and only through exercising the right to apply for retrial can the court formally review, re-file, and enter the review procedure. Petitions and complaints generally occur after the parties have gone through the statutory litigation procedures and are still dissatisfied with the effective legal documents. By submitting complaint and petition materials, the court processes them through a review method. If it finds that the original judgment, ruling, or mediation document is indeed erroneous and needs to be retried for correction, it should initiate a retrial ex officio and make a decision on the retrial. If it finds that the reasons for the complaint are not established and the original judgment, ruling, or mediation document can be maintained, it generally will not accept it, and in practice, it is also rare to notify the rejection of the complaint in writing.
4. The types of judicial documents for ex officio retrial are broader than those for parties applying for retrial
Article 209 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China does not limit the types of judgments, rulings, or mediation documents; as long as they have taken legal effect, they can be subject to ex officio retrial. Therefore, theoretically, any effective judgment, ruling, or mediation document can be subject to ex officio retrial. In conjunction with Article 210 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China and Article 378 of the Supreme People's Court's interpretation on the application of the Civil Procedure Law, which stipulates that parties cannot apply for retrial in cases handled by special procedures, the scope of legal documents for ex officio retrial is significantly broader than the types of legal documents that parties can apply for retrial.
5. Types of cases that should be retried ex officio
1. In accordance with Article 21 of the Supreme People's Court's interpretation on several issues concerning the application of the Civil Procedure Law's trial supervision procedures (2020 revision), cases that should be reviewed ex officio include: cases where the parties have not applied for retrial, the people's procuratorate has not applied for appeal, but the people's court finds that the original judgment, ruling, or mediation document has indeed errors that harm national interests, social public interests, etc.
2. Cases other than the types mentioned above
In conjunction with the provisions of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China and its judicial interpretations, as well as the views of the Supreme Court and scholars, if a case is indeed erroneous and cannot be initiated for retrial through the parties' application and appeal, the people's court can decide whether to initiate retrial review and retrial ex officio.
(1) Cases involved in the retrial procuratorial suggestions submitted by the procuratorial organs to the people's court in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Procedure Law and relevant judicial interpretations and documents, to which the people's court needs to respond.
(2) Effective judgments made due to the instruction of a higher-level court for retrial, where the explicit designated retrial opinions of the higher-level court were not considered during retrial, and no report was made before the judgment, resulting in adverse social effects of the effective judgment, which need to be reviewed ex officio for whether there are still 'indeed erroneous' circumstances.
(3) During the trial and execution of a case, if it is found that the relevant effective judgments of the Supreme Court or lower-level courts may contain errors that affect the trial of the case, a review of the effective judgment is needed.
(4) For effective judgments of the Supreme Court or lower-level courts, if there are instructions from relevant higher-level agencies or leadership agencies, or if they are of concern to relevant parties, and other matters that require implementation or response from the people's court as instructed by the president of the Supreme Court.
(5) In the work of legal clarification and post-judgment inquiries, if it is found that the effective judgments of the Supreme Court may contain errors, and in the work of petitions, if it is found that the effective judgments of the Supreme Court and lower-level courts may contain errors, but according to legal provisions, retrial cannot be applied for.
(6) In order to respond to the significant social impact caused by effective judgments, it is necessary to review whether there are indeed errors in the effective judgments ex officio.
(7) After repeated appeals from the original trial parties, a review is conducted to quell the urgent litigation-related petition events triggered by the effective judgment.
Six, the standard for the court to initiate ex officio is that there are indeed errors in the effective judgment.
Unlike the clear statutory grounds for retrial applied for by the parties and the prosecution's appeal, the people's court initiates a retrial ex officio based on the standard of "there are indeed errors." The standard of "there are indeed errors" is considered too vague and general in both theoretical and practical circles, lacking specific criteria and operability, and carries a strong subjective color, making it difficult to grasp in practice. It is generally believed that the standard of "there are indeed errors" in initiating a retrial ex officio is stricter than the grounds for parties to apply for a retrial and should be close to or equivalent to the standard for retrial modification. Some scholars believe that the "there are indeed errors" stipulated in Article 209 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China refers to basic factual errors that are sufficient to lead to the revocation of the effective judgment, using legal errors. The following circumstances can be regarded as basic factual errors or legal application errors sufficient to lead to the revocation of the effective judgment: (1) The reasoning of the judgment contradicts the judgment result and the reasoning violates legal provisions; (2) The facts of the case determined by the judgment contradict the evidence relied upon, resulting in an unjust judgment; (3) Contradiction with precedent judgments of similar nature and case facts, resulting in an unjust judgment and adverse consequences; (4) The effective judgment has the circumstances that damage national interests and social public interests as stipulated in Article 21 of the Interpretation of Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (2020 Revision) by the Supreme People's Court; (5) Other circumstances that are sufficient to lead to the revocation of the original trial judgment due to basic factual errors or legal application errors.
According to the provisions of the second paragraph of Article 209 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, if the Supreme Court finds that there are indeed errors in the judgments, rulings, and mediation documents that have taken legal effect from local people's courts at all levels, and if the higher people's court finds errors in the judgments, rulings, and mediation documents that have taken legal effect from the lower people's courts, it can initiate a retrial ex officio, either by reviewing the case or instructing the lower people's court to conduct a retrial. However, in judicial practice, there is a trend among people's courts at all levels to instruct retrials, and correspondingly, the retrial modification rate has gradually declined.
Key words:
Related News
Zhongcheng Qingtai Jinan Region
Address: Floor 55-57, Jinan China Resources Center, 11111 Jingshi Road, Lixia District, Jinan City, Shandong Province
