Home
Letters to Editor
Domestic
World
Business & Trade
Culture & Science
Travel
Society
Government
Opinions
Policy Making in Depth
People
Investment
Life
Books/Reviews
News of This Week
Learning Chinese
Courts to Impose Time Limits on Evidence

Judges in civil cases will be able to refuse to consider evidence produced beyond a certain time limit under a regulation issued Sunday by the Supreme People's Court.

According to the Regulation on Evidence in Civil Lawsuits, failure to produce evidence within the time limit will be considered a renunciation of the right. Cross-examination on any evidence produced afterwards will only be possible with the agreement of the other party in the case.

The time limit for producing evidence will either be jointly decided by the parties in a case or set by the court. If decided by the court, the time limit should be no less than 30 days.

China's current Civil Procedure Law only stipulates parties can produce new evidence in court but is not specific. The vagueness has given rise to increased delay of producing evidence. Some parties in cases avoid handing in evidence before a hearing to gain an advantage in court.

Cao Jianming, vice-president of the Supreme People's Court, said: "This has not only violated the good-faith doctrine but also infringed upon the legitimate rights of the other party. It constitutes an important hurdle to the efficient handling of cases."

Imposing a barrier to efficiency in court is the difficulty of gathering evidence caused by the 10-year-old Civil Procedure Law, which only sets down the principle that parties are obliged to provide evidence to support their allegation but includes no details.

It is not uncommon for courts to help collect evidence in cases where the defendant refuses to co-operate in the gathering of evidence.

The regulation, which will take effect next April, stipulates the defendant is obliged to produce evidence in eight kinds of cases, including alleged patent violations, pollution and faulty products that harm the other parties.

Parties who fail to produce evidence will "bear the disadvantageous consequences," according to the regulation. The regulation also stipulates materials gained by violating others' legitimate rights or through illegal measures will not be considered as evidence.

(China Daily December 31, 2001)


Courts to Deliver Better Services
Better Protection of Rights Ensured
New Rules Stress Evidence
Beijing Courts Reform Rules of Evidence
New Rules Aim to Improve Beijing’s Court System
Copyright ? China Internet Information Center. All Rights Reserved
E-mail: webmaster@china.org.cn Tel: 86-10-68996214/15/16
主站蜘蛛池模板: 机机对机机120分免费无遮挡| 精品国产人成亚洲区| 国产精品无码无需播放器| s女m男调教337799| 精品无码一区二区三区在线| 国产日韩一区二区三区在线观看| 91制片厂(果冻传媒)原档破解| 女同一区二区在线观看| 中文字幕在线永久| 日本特黄特黄刺激大片| 亚洲av专区无码观看精品天堂| 美国式禁忌矿桥矿17集| 国产免费久久精品| 成人观看网站a| 国产第一福利136视频导航| 91色视频在线| 在线视频www| ts人妖另类在线| 巨胸动漫美女被爆羞羞视频| 中文字幕免费在线观看动作大片| 日本大片免a费观看视频| 久久精品女人毛片国产| 杨贵妃艳史毛片在线播放免费观看| 亚洲大成色www永久网址| 欧美老熟妇牲交| 亚洲精品无码久久久久| 狠狠色综合一区二区| 免费人成在线观看网站| 精品一区二区三区电影| 十六以下岁女子毛片免费| 老鸭窝毛片一区二区三区| 国产人妖视频一区在线观看| 97久久精品一区二区三区| 天堂中文8资源在线8| www.成人在线| 日本视频免费在线| 九九九国产精品成人免费视频| 欧美三级中文字幕在线观看| 亚洲国产成人久久77| 男女裸体影院高潮| 免费黄色毛片视频|