The Higher People's Court of Tianjin has issued three cases to
which lower courts can refer in making judgments, the first time a
Chinese higher court has issued set legal precedents.
All the three cases were civil disputes, including the case of a
bank that sued a wool spinning factory that defaulted on loans
totaling four million yuan (US$482,000).
Law experts held that legal precedents could offer remedies to
relative imprecision and vagueness of civil laws under which judges
are usually allowed more freedom in their decisions.
"It's a judicial practice of vital importance," said Chen
Yaodong, director of the society of economic laws under the China
Law Society. "It will have a very positive impact by raising the
levels of lower courts in administering justice and maintaining
consistency between legislation and enforcement."
Legal precedents are not endorsed as part of legislation in
China, but on some occasions "typical" cases that have been settled
are referred to in making judgments. The Supreme People's Court
released typical cases it collected and thought instructive on a
quarterly basis to instruct lower courts, and the Law Research
Institute under the Supreme People's Court published Selected Cases
Settled by People's Courts.
Law specialists agreed that the practice of legal precedents
could help to protect the integration of the law and guarantee
impartiality and efficiency in administering justice.
Moreover, legal precedents could promote supervision of law
enforcement as law experts, lawyers and the public were able to
consult specific cases as well as established legislation.
The Higher People's Court of Tianjin Municipality took nine
months to select sample cases to be issued as precedents. Tian
Haowei, presiding judge of the No. 2 Civil Court under the higher
court, said the legal precedents were chosen and selected through
discussion by experienced senior judges and verified by the
judicial committee of the higher court.
Zhang Baifeng, president of the Higher People's Court of Tianjin
Municipality, said that precedents were the most illustrative and
telling explanation of the law, and could help people understand
the law. They would also help prevent different laws being applied
to similar cases or contradictory verdicts on similar cases despite
the application of the same law by inexperienced or incapable
judges.
China's lower courts had numerous examples of similar disputes
receiving contradictory judgments due to the increasing number of
cases and the differing opinions of judges.
The precedents issued by the Higher People's Court of Tianjin
Municipality are for consultations, and were not compulsorily
binding for judges. But Tian, the presiding judge, said that lower
courts should give reasons for not following precedents in trying
similar cases. If no convincing reasons were provided to justify
verdicts against the principle of legal precedent, the verdicts
were likely to be amended, Tian added.
The higher court would issue more typical cases to instruct
judges in civil law cases in lower courts, according to Tian.
Law experts said the practice of legal precedents would not
affect the principle of the independence of Chinese courts at all
levels in accordance with the law.
(Xinhua News Agency August 1, 2003)