Abstract
The chapter deals with the present case management system in China, which is qualified as ‘trial management’, and the need to change this into case management in the more traditional sense of the word. Trial management in China is currently very much focused on controlling the judges by way of administrative bodies and reducing their powers in relation to the court system as a whole, whereas case management increases the power of individual judges and enhances cooperation between the parties, their lawyers and the court. The author argues that a transition from trial management to case management is needed in China.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The case management system in the modern sense originates in late nineteenth-century Europe, although at the beginning, and for a long period of time afterwards, this terminology was not used to describe the system.
- 2.
Damaska 1997.
- 3.
See the 2008 Guiding Opinions of the Supreme People’s Court on Carrying Out Case Quality Evaluation.
- 4.
For example, the time-frame taken into consideration when assessing the courts and the judges is 1 year. As a result, the filing of cases is stimulated at the beginning of the year and their finalisation at the end of the year. With regard to cases filed at the end of year, the court will persuade the litigants to withdraw them and start them again in the following year.
- 5.
Huai Xiaofeng 2006, p. 239.
- 6.
The Supreme People’s Court of China set up a trial management office on 23 November 2010. The office is responsible for trial management, management of judicial staff and management of the judicial administration. As of December 2010, 25 high courts, and 900 intermediate and primary courts have set up a special trial management office.
- 7.
Damaska 1986, p. 75.
- 8.
Art. 122 of the Civil Procedure Law, amended recently, provides that civil disputes that are brought before the people’s court and that are suitable for mediation, should first be mediated, except if the parties refuse mediation.
- 9.
Grossi and Pagni 2010, p. 3, 4.
- 10.
Ibidem.
References
Damaska MR (1986) The faces of justice and state authority: a comparative approach to the legal process. Yale University Press, New Haven
Damaska MR (1997) Evidence law adrift. Yale University Press, Boston
Grossi S, Pagni MC (2010) Commentary on the Italian code of civil procedure. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Huai Xiaofeng (2006) The court and the judge. Law Press, Beijing (in Chinese)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fuhua, W. (2014). From ‘Trial Management’ to ‘Case Management’. In: van Rhee, C., Yulin, F. (eds) Civil Litigation in China and Europe. Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, vol 31. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7666-1_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7666-1_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-7665-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-7666-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)