On Civil Diversification Of The Trial-level System Build

In analysis of evolution of Chinese jurisdiction levels and actuality hereof, referring to jurisdiction levels systems in western countries and in research into fundamental theories jurisdiction levels in our country, this dissertation puts forward establishment of multiple jurisdiction levels in this country.In the perspective of purpose of jurisdiction levels, setup and choose of jurisdiction levels system of any country has its roots in the litigation tradition, fundamental sense of value on litigation and needs for judicial practice. Among basic factors, which must be taken into count in setting up jurisdiction levels systems in any country, is how to balance between litigation effectiveness and litigation justness. An ideal jurisdiction levels system should in an as concise form as possible function properly both in correcting wrong judges and in consolidating adoption of law.Effectiveness and litigation justness are taken into account in our country where second-instance- being-the-final-instance system is established. However, judicial abuses exist in this second-instance- being-the-final-instance system when such aspects of it as its inherent structure, its characteristic, its application in the judicial practice, etc is considered. As a result, welded to our country's peculiar judicial framework, negative consequences take into being which impairs justness of procedure severely and the realization of effective procedure is unable to remedy the impair.A variety of jurisdiction levels systems exist respectively in a variety of countries. In general, constructions of courts are commonly shaped into pyramid structure, i.e. they consist of courts for first trial, courts for appeal and supreme courts which exert the function of jurisdiction levels.It is concluded in this dissertation: a"multiple jurisdiction levels"in our country may be set up in weighting of all kinks of factors. In other words, first-instance-being-the-final-instance process for cases on minor-amount property disputes and simple non-litigation; third-instance-being-the-final-instance process for cases on dispute of greatness in amount or cases with general or primary signification of law; second-instance-being-the-final-instance process for other cases. In the mean time, launch of retrial process should be confined in a certain restricted range. Appeal process should be subject to extended trial procedure in framework of which trial on court shall be applied in principle, while trial on paper shall be taken into being for complementarities.