In the first-instance judgments of civil cases in China, you can often see such a sentence at the end: "If you are not satisfied with this judgment, you can submit an appeal to this court within fifteen days from the date of service of this judgment..." The language used by different courts in different places may be slightly different, but the meaning expressed is the same, that is, the first-instance judgment will not have legal effect until fifteen days after it is served.
However, the second-instance judgment ends with a different phrase: "This judgment is a final judgment", or "This judgment shall take effect immediately upon service". That is to say, as long as the parties see the second-instance judgment, it means that it has already taken effect.
Why is there such a difference between the first instance and the second instance? This brings us to China's basic civil trial system- the two-instance final adjudication system.
The two-instance final adjudication system means that all civil cases are declared to be concluded after trial by the courts of the first instance and the second instance, and the judgment results immediately take legal effect, and the parties no longer have the right to appeal.
<h1 class= "pgc-h-arrow-right" > the types of first- and non-dual-instance cases</h1>
The two-instance final adjudication system does not simply mean that a case has undergone two trials, but refers to the pronouncement of judgment by two levels of courts. Because in judicial practice, there are two situations that are very similar to two trials but do not belong to two trials.
The first: two trials in a first-class court. We often hear a term for "remand for retrial" in the news, which refers to the fact that after a first-instance judgment, the court of second instance believes that the facts of the case found by the court of first instance are unclear, or the evidence is insufficient, or the procedures are flawed, so as to remand the case back to the court of first instance for retrial. A new trial means that the previous trial was annuled, so even though the case was formally tried twice, it still belongs to the first instance. Because although this case has undergone two trials, it has not been tried by two levels of courts, so it is not a two-instance trial.
The second type: arraignment by a higher court. The referral referred to in this division refers to cases in which a lower court has not yet decided a judgment in which the lower court believes that it should hear itself, and the lower court refers to the situation in which it is tried by itself. In this case, although the case has gone through two levels of court, it has not undergone two trials, so it is not a two-instance case.
<h1 class= "pgc-h-arrow-right" > special cases of the second and first instance final trials</h1>
Two-instance final adjudication is a basic system of civil litigation in China, but in some special cases, there will also be a situation where the first instance is the final trial.
(1) Special procedures cases. According to Article 178 of the Civil Procedure Law, special procedure cases shall be tried in the first instance and finally. Special procedures cases, on the other hand, include, in accordance with the provisions of Article 177: hearing cases of voter eligibility; cases of declaration of disappearance or death; cases of determining that citizens have no capacity for civil conduct or limited capacity for civil conduct; cases of determining property ownership; cases of confirming mediation agreements and cases of realizing security interests.
(2) Small claims cases. For simple civil cases heard by basic level courts or their dispatched courts, where the facts are clear, the rights and obligations are clear, and the dispute is not large, and the subject matter is less than 30 percent of the average annual salary of employed personnel in each province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the Central Government in the previous year, it is a small litigation case, and the summary procedure is applied, and the first-instance final trial system is implemented.
(3) First-instance cases heard by the Supreme People's Court. Second-instance cases need to be appealed to the people's court at the level above the court of first instance, and the Supreme People's Court, as the highest level court, does not exist at the higher level, so the first-instance cases heard by the Supreme People's Court are actually the final trial of the first instance. However, in order to protect the parties' right to appeal, the scope of first-instance cases heard by the Supreme People's Court is extremely small.
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" > principle of immediate effect of third- and second-instance judgments</h1>
After understanding the relationship between the two trials and the final trial, let's analyze in detail why the second-instance judgment will take effect immediately after it is served on the parties.
The reason why the first-instance judgment does not take effect until fifteen days after the parties receive them is because the parties have the right to appeal the judgment results. And rights need to have a time to exercise, which is fifteen days. The parties need to exercise their right to appeal within fifteen days, otherwise the right to appeal disappears. But disappearing does not mean that the judgment is effective, because other parties also have the right to appeal.
After the second-instance judgment, the parties no longer have the right to appeal, and there is no need to reserve a period for them to exercise their rights. Therefore, the second-instance judgments take effect immediately after they are served on the parties. However, the entry into force of the judgment does not mean that the parties need to perform or complete the obligations in the judgment immediately, but rather that they must perform the obligations according to the time and manner required by the judgment.
As for the parties who are still dissatisfied with the results of the judgment that have already taken effect, it is not that there are no remedies, that is, to apply to the people's court for a retrial. People's courts will also take the initiative to decide on a retrial of judgments, rulings, or mediations that are truly erroneous.
Before the retrial comes, it is better to take the initiative and obediently perform the obligations according to the content of the effective judgment, ruling or mediation.