Research On The Application Of The Sole Appointment System In Civil Second Instance

With the development of the economy,civil cases have been increasing in recent years,and the implementation of the system of specified number of personnel has led to a decrease in the number of judges compared to before.Therefore,in judicial practice,there is a situation where judges face significant pressure.In order to alleviate the pressure of litigation and achieve more effective resource allocation,at the end of 2019,China proposed a pilot plan for the separation of complexity and simplicity,providing a certain legal basis for the application of the second instance sole appointment system.After two years of pilot work,the newly revised Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China was promulgated at the end of 2021,which officially stipulated the application conditions of the second instance sole-judge trial system appointment system in Article 41 of the new law.However,the theoretical community has mixed opinions on the implementation of the second instance sole appointment system,and the newly revised procedural law has abandoned some more radical views compared to the revised Civil Procedure Law,indicating that the expansion of the second instance sole appointment system still has exploration value.In addition,scholars have previously focused on exploring the rationality of the second instance sole appointment system,and have varying opinions on the specific application issues of the expansion of the sole appointment system to the second instance.The academic community has different interpretations of the substantive requirements of the application of the second instance sole appointment system,such as "clear facts","clear rights and obligations",and "not much dispute".However,there is no unified standard for the application of the second instance sole appointment and conversion during the trial process.Starting from three different cases,this article identifies specific issues in the application of the second instance sole appointment system in practice and proposes corresponding improvement suggestions.In Chapter 1,this article selects three cases with different causes of action during the pilot period and after the amendment of the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China.By summarizing the number of parties involved in these three cases,the complexity of the case,the application of legal provisions,whether the focus of dispute in the case has changed,whether new evidence has been presented in the second instance,the differences in trial methods,conversion of trial procedures,and trial deadlines.proposed issues related to the standards,trial methods,procedure conversion,and trial deadline for the application of the second instance sole appointment system.In Chapter 2,the text provides corresponding legal analysis of the issues raised through the above case analysis.Regarding the issue of applicable standards,this article mainly discusses through two aspects: substantive and formal elements.It is believed that the focus should be on whether the case itself is complex,and the main judgment criteria should be whether there is an application of legal principles in the application of legal provisions and whether there are differences in the understanding of legal provisions;Regarding the issue of standard trial methods,this article combines case analysis to find that the standards are not consistent;Regarding the issue of program conversion,it was found that there are relatively few regulations regarding the initiation and decision,approval and supervision,inheritance and continuation;Regarding the issue of trial deadline,this article found through case analysis that the trial deadline for cases under the sole appointment system is relatively shorter than that for cases under the collegial system.In Chapter 3,this article proposes perfection measure to address the issues raised in the previous case analysis section.Firstly,regarding the issue of application standards,this article proposes to establish a subjective and objective list to anticipate the scope of application of the second instance independent case,while also strengthening the limitations of the scope,in order to prevent the disorderly expansion of the second instance independent case system;Secondly,regarding the issue of trial methods,this article proposes to strengthen the implementation of the principle of trial in court,and lists the situations where there is no trial in court and whether there is a need for a second trial in court after the procedure is changed;Once again,regarding the issue of procedural conversion,suggestions are the conversion of procedures is proposed by the sole judge and strengthen the establishment of a dual track system;For the issue of the trial deadline,suggestions are proposed to appropriately shorten the single appointment system,extend the trial deadline of the collegial system,and confirm specific time nodes for certain parts.