Walking Through The Tradition And Modern Times

Under the circumstance of the promotion of "harmonious society" and "stability is key point,", the dispute resolution are required to achieve the aim of good "social effect" and "wind up a case and dispose a matter". However, through the investigation to reality, we find what hide behind the better data of"withdraw case rate","appeal rate"and"Xinfang rate"is actually a lot of case with "case winded up but not dispose a matter".George Herbert Mead once said: "We can not have the right, unless we have a common attitude." In my view, this logic also applies to dispute resolution. If dispute clients and dispute solvers can't reach a common concept and attitude of dispute resolution, then the proper settlement of disputes will likely not be successfully achieved. This article is just from this perspective, analyze a common but almost not the "case winded up but not dispose a matter" case, present a different concept of dispute resolution in dispute clients and dispute solvers'mind.Huang Yong and Guo Li Rong divorced because of controversial emotion, finally reached divorce. Although both sides had incompatible point, the Huangs still hoped that through the mediation of village chief to resolve this matter, in their view, this can maximize the "not harmony," the performance of a traditional human community attachment. In mediation, dispute resolution as a village chief who bent the traditional concept of "rather demolition of ten, do not split a temple marriage" as a start, Huang Yong, the parties ultimately made the loss of confidence in mediation, because in his view, the divorce was his right, he can not be achieved from the mediation of this right. So he found a symbol of the modern dispute settlement mechanism - the Court for decision and Guo Li Rong divorce. Through trial, in accordance with the evidence to identify the final lifting of the marriage relationship between the two sides. Divorce dispute had been resolved. In the following analysis of production Guo Li Rong sue Huang Yong, the court first require to reach a verdict. Guo Li Rong, but then face the right of non-normal expression, is entirely to show a "conciliatory" attitude, and under the control of this concept of reasonable changes in the original decision. However, this approach although temporarily subsided Guo Li Rong's "wrapped around downtown," but it caused dissatisfaction Huang, Huang Yong's father, twice after the verdict to the court to "seek to say." Investigation the situation in this case, dispute solvers and dispute clients actually hold two completely opposite concepts of dispute resolution. Presented by the parties is a "tradition outside and modern inside" feature. Enthusiam in maintaining "traditional relationship" is only a appearance, the realization of rights is the core what they pursued. The dispute solvers have a contrast concept, presents a "modern outside and tradition inside" feature. Under normal circumstances, they are in a strict and modern rules, procedures, dispute resolution concept, but when faced with "legal effect and social effect of conflict" when they quickly abandoned the stick to the rules and procedures, exposing the traditional "interest of First Instance "The concept of dispute resolution. But this party and used to meet the "interest litigation" strategy, and also often at the expense of the other party's entitlement to costs, so they give rise to new grievances, and finally to the handling of cases fall into a vicious circle, and even this lead to Xinfang.Thus, in order to truly fulfill the aim of " wind up a case and dispose a matter " in maximum, the country's judicial policy should address the current right awareness deep in citizen's mind, and on this basis, to promote dispute solvers and dispute clients to form a common concept of dispute resolution.