On Withdrawal Of Civil Procedure

The challenge system of civil litigation is in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations, judicial personnel and other personnel in the interest relationships and the civil case may influence impartial handling of the case by case to avoid or out of the hearing of the civil case law system. Withdrawal system is a system designed for people to pursue judicial justice,It contains a wealth of theoretical essence,As long as the referee and referee who has a relationship or have a legal interest relations with the results of the proceedings, will be excluded in the case, which in the system guarantees a fair trial of the case.The withdrawal system of civil procedure is mainly reflected in the procedural justice and litigation justice and safeguard the litigious right of the parties. And the combination of foreign civil litigation avoidance system and civil litigation of our country avoidance system in the history, it is not difficult to find, civil litigation avoidance system is more and more attention to protect the parties’ right to appeal, maintain fairness and justice.However, China’s civil litigation avoidance system still exist many shortcomings, such as avoiding the omission of the subject reason of the challenge of uncertainty, relief means is unitary and so on, which is not conducive to ensure the fairness and justice, is not conducive to the litigant’s right of suit.By comparison, other countries have a lot to learn from the avoidance system. First of all, on the avoidance of objects, the common law countries to the jury as an important object to avoid, and the judge is in a subordinate position to avoid the object. Did not say whether the identification of people, the survey and inspection personnel are to avoid objects. Continental legal system to avoid the object is mainly refers to the judge, didn’t clear mentioned the appraiser inquest and supporting members of the judiciary avoidance related issues, the countries of continental law system on avoidance provisions of the scope of the object of to broad. Secondly, on the grounds of avoidance, the reasons for the withdrawal of the common law system are divided into two types, the withdrawal of the jury and the withdrawal of the judge. There are reasons for the withdrawal of the jury and the points of no reason. Again, to avoid the method of view, the common law countries to apply for withdrawal from the main, the mainland legal system countries to avoid the way is to avoid, apply for withdrawal, only a few countries regulate the terms of reference to avoid. Furthermore, the decision to withdraw the main, both countries of Anglo American law system and continental law countries are generally by decision of the president of the superior court and the needs of the majority of collegial court of review, in order not made before the challenged personnel opinions should be heard. Finally, in the withdrawal application was rejected after the remedy, British and American law countries and continental law countries have appeal and counterappeal.So we can learn from foreign advanced experience, based on China’s national conditions based, courts, prosecutors into the avoidance of the scope of the subject, defines avoidable reason to more specific and clear, to safeguard the litigant’s right to know to ensure implementation of avoidance in the second instance, and improve the means of relief, the addition of the appeal system in order to better safeguard the party’s litigation right, comply with the tide of historical development.