| The pretrial conference of civil litigations is an independent procedure juxtaposing with trial procedure. Establishing a pre-procedure that has a special value is a new project not only in practice, but also in theory. Meanwhile, it is one of focal points in our country's civil litigation system reforming.The pretrial conference of civil litigations is the preparation stage of the trial procedure from the litigant instituting a lawsuit to opening a court session, which also can be called "pretrial preparation procedure". The legal value that systems of pretrial produce pursue is the balance of justice, efficiency and profitability. Judicial justice is the foremost objective that the systems of pretrial conference of civil litigation finally pursue. While insuring the justice, it must improve efficiency and profitability in the suit, and attain the equilibrium among them. Nowadays, in our country, the system of pretrial preparation is in the beginning stage with only some preparation work for opening the court session, such as service of litigious documents, informing rights and obligations of parties, noticing litigants innerving action and etc, which is unable to launch the parties to positively intervene, or to find the best path to solve the dispute. We analyze the existent blemishes in tradit way of civil judgment in our country, namely the "four steps to the court", and "one step goes to the court" adopted by every local court since the civil judgment reforming in 1980's. Current articles of Civil Procedures Law concerning "pretrial preparation" is "preparation stage", which lack intrinsic impetus of the procedure system, that is launching the parties and other civil litigant participants to actively innerving action and searching the most proper path to solve dispute. Therefore, it shouldn't be named as "procedure".This article selects the representative state pretrial conference of civil litigations in two legal systems to analyze from the point of comparative law. The main contents of this section include: the founder of common law system, namely the British civil procedure system, which adopts adversary system. The American pretrial civil procedure inherits and promotes British tradition. The litigants decide process, while the court supervises procedure and applies judicial security. Germany is a typical country of continental law system, which uses Inquisitorial system. The judge dominates the pretrial conference, and decides the procedure process. However, it changed to Adversary system after reforming the civil procedure in 1976.The pretrial conference embodies compatible situation of the two doctrines, which also shows the trend of globalization of law. By comparative study of different pretrial civil procedure, there are many similarities in different law system and doctrines. The first one is they both have burden of proof distribution and strict system of time limits for producing evidence. The evidence, which is not appealed by pretrial conference, cannot be showed in the court, and judge would not accept it too. The second, strict loss of right in pleading civil process has been regulated in many nations. Pleading process since is the right of the party concerned is also responsibility. The third, the related provision concerning pretrial conference in all countries is almost the same. The pretrial conference in reality has the function of percolation—deal with the case whose right and responsibility is obvious, just some difficulty and complex case going completed to trial procedure. The fourth separated the judges in pretrial and in trial, show pursuance of civil procedural justice. In the last part we expatiate the legal basis of pretrial conference in our country, give some advice on the constitution in the pretrial conference of civil litigations system: at present, the pretrial conference mainly depend on Civil Procedures Law and Regulations of Civil Procedural Evidence by the Highest Court. The pretrial conference system may have four functions: servic...
|
PDF Full Text Request