Study on the Application of the Restrictive Admission in the Newly-Revised Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Evidence in Civil Procedures

The Supreme People’s Court classifies admission into two types-complete admission and restrictive admission-according to the degree and scope of admission.Article 7 of the newly-revised Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Evidence in Civil Procedures provides clear rules for restrictive admission,which is divided into partial admission and conditional admission.In judicial practice,it is relatively easier to identify partial admission.However,the determination of conditional admission entails further considerations regarding whether there is a legal nexus between the attached condition and the admitted fact.Therefore,this study argues that there is a lack of unified rules regarding the applicability of restrictive admission in practice.Starting from the examples from the Supreme People’s Court,this study analyzed the application of conditional admission in judicial practice,as well as the problems and causes in the application of restrictive admission in practice.This article also explores the route to perfecting the rules of restrictive admission from the perspectives of its definition,classification,the onus probandi(burden of proof)and supporting mechanisms.

Application and Regulation of Legal Science and Technology on the Pilot Program of the Reform of Separation between Complicated Cases and Simple Ones in Civil Procedure in the Basic People’s Courts

Blockchain,artificial intelligence,and other technologies have been increasingly integrated with the law,and the construction of smart justice and Internet courts in various places has a prominent effect on court informatization.The Supreme People’s Court is currently carrying out the pilot reform of separation between complicated and simple cases in civil procedure,and legal technology will inevitably become a major means to enable the reform.In the field of electronic litigation,legal technology itself has become a goal of the reform.Regarding the trials of pilot basic courts,legal technology has been more deeply applied in many links such as trial activities and trial management,playing an essential role in improving judicial efficiency,and becoming an important way to solve judicial dilemmas such as“litigation explosion.”However,the history of modern society reminds us that we should be reasonably optimistic about the development of technology,especially in the field of justice.

The Idea of the Judicial System in a Large Country and the Development of International Civil Procedure in China

The development of China’s international civil procedure should correspond to the development of the country’s reform and opening to the outside world.As a large economic country,China needs to draw on international civil procedures to guarantee its worldwide interests;and as a large country with the rule of law,it needs to improve the level of its judicial services and enhance the market attraction of its judicial system in global dispute resolution.Given that a country’s judicial system is an important element in measuring its comprehensive competitiveness,the global competitiveness of our international civil procedure is one of the goals to be pursued in the reform of Chinese judicial system.In order to raise the level of Chinese international civil procedure,China should emphasize the idea of the judicial system of a large country and prioritize its competitiveness,service orientation and cooperative approach to dispute resolution.In addition,it should focus on the following reforms:firstly,establishing a specialized system of international civil jurisdiction,with an increase in matters for competitive jurisdiction;secondly,enhancing China’s specialist services capacity in international civil actions,highlighting the expedient protection given to the rights of the parties concerned and stressing the professional development of judicial bodies in the commercial field;and thirdly,strengthening international judicial cooperation and facilitating the global movement of Chinese judgments.

CHOICE OF COURT AGREEMENT WITH FOREIGN ELEMENTS IN CHINA： SHANDONG JUFENG V. SOUTH KOREA MGAME

Unlike statutory and discretionary jurisdiction, jurisdiction by choice of court agreement concluded in foreign-related civil and commercial matters should be decided by the parties. As a special contract, the choice of court agreement is so independent that its validity is governed by the law chosen by the parties or by the law of the country where the chosen court is situated in case that the choice of law is invalid. Amendments to the Civil Procedure Law （hereinafter referred to as ＂CPL＂） of People＇s Republic of China （2012） should not only include the jurisdiction by choice of court agreement with foreign-related elements, but also stipulate it in a more standardized way, rather than simply refer to provision of jurisdiction by choice of court agreement in domestic cases. At the same time, the CPL should make the scope of application of choice of court agreement more clear, and provide choice of law clause and its confirmative elements when deciding its effectiveness.