Copyright 2014 by Stanford University Guiding Cases Analytics TM 指导性案例分析 TM Dr. Mei Gechlik Founder and Director, China Guiding Cases Project Issue No. 2 (July 2014) Guiding Cases Analytics TM analyzes trends in the Guiding Cases selected and released by China’s Supreme People’s Court and identifies important issues for further study. Expected to be an essential supplement to the qualitative analysis of cases, Guiding Cases Analytics TM will help deepen our understanding of China’s court system and case law. 指导性案例分析 TM 对中国最高人民法院所挑选、公布的指导性案例的发展趋势作出分析, 并确定值得进一步研究的重要课题。指导性案例分析 TM 有望成为案件定性分析的重要补 充,有助于加深我们对中国法院系统和案例法的理解。 * * * Article 1 of the Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court Concerning Work on Guiding Cases (the “Provisions”), promulgated on November 26, 2010, provides: “The Supreme People’s Court shall determine and uniformly release as Guiding Cases those cases that have the effect of guiding adjudication and enforcement work in courts throughout the country.” Article 2 of the Provisions lists the following requirements: “The Guiding Cases referred to in this set of Provisions mean the rulings and judgments that have taken legal effect and which are cases that meet the following conditions: (i) are of widespread concern in society; (ii) legal provisions are of relatively general nature; (iii) are of a typical nature; (iv) are difficult, complicated, or of new types; [or] (v) other cases having a guiding effect.”
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Copyright 2014 by Stanford University
Guiding Cases AnalyticsTM
指导性案例分析TM
Dr. Mei Gechlik
Founder and Director, China Guiding Cases Project
Issue No. 2 (July 2014)
Guiding Cases AnalyticsTM
analyzes trends in the Guiding Cases selected and released by
China’s Supreme People’s Court and identifies important issues for further study. Expected to be
an essential supplement to the qualitative analysis of cases, Guiding Cases AnalyticsTM
will help
deepen our understanding of China’s court system and case law.
指导性案例分析TM对中国最高人民法院所挑选、公布的指导性案例的发展趋势作出分析,
并确定值得进一步研究的重要课题。指导性案例分析TM有望成为案件定性分析的重要补
充,有助于加深我们对中国法院系统和案例法的理解。
* * *
Article 1 of the Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court Concerning Work on Guiding Cases
(the “Provisions”), promulgated on November 26, 2010, provides:
“The Supreme People’s Court shall determine and uniformly release as Guiding
Cases those cases that have the effect of guiding adjudication and enforcement
work in courts throughout the country.”
Article 2 of the Provisions lists the following requirements:
“The Guiding Cases referred to in this set of Provisions mean the rulings and
judgments that have taken legal effect and which are cases that meet the following
conditions:
(i) are of widespread concern in society;
(ii) legal provisions are of relatively general nature;
(iii) are of a typical nature;
(iv) are difficult, complicated, or of new types; [or]
(v) other cases having a guiding effect.”
Copyright 2014 by Stanford University
2
Number of Guiding Cases
Since 2011, the Supreme People’s Court (“SPC”) has issued seven batches of Guiding Cases
(“GCs”). The fifth and seventh batches have six and five GCs, respectively, while all of the
other batches have four. In 2012, the SPC released eight GCs in total, followed by ten in 2013
and nine in the first two quarters of 2014 (see Chart 1). The growing trend shows the SPC’s
interest in using GCs as a tool to provide more guidance on adjudication.
Chart 1: Number of GCs Issued per Quarter
Areas of Law Covered by Guiding Cases
Eight GCs cover criminal law, while four and three GCs cover company law and civil procedure
law, respectively. Other areas of law listed in Chart 2 are covered by one or two GCs. Given
that even Zhou Qiang, President of the SPC, admitted in his report to the national legislature that
some courts had delivered wrong verdicts and that the credibility of the court system had been
undermined,1 the SPC’s release of more GCs to provide lower level courts with better guidance
on the application of criminal rules is welcome.
It took a while for the SPC to release GCs covering areas that particularly capture foreign
businesses’ attention. The first GC on patent law was not released until 2013 Q4 (Guiding Case
No. 20) and the first two GCs on anti-unfair competition law were not released until 2014 Q2
(Guiding Case Nos. 29 and 30) (see Chart 2). Will the next release include a GC covering
antimonopoly law? There are certainly good candidates. For example, Renren v. Baidu (2009),
the first private lawsuit under China’s Anti-Monopoly Law, and Rainbow Medical Equipment &
Supplies v. Johnson & Johnson (2013), in which the Shanghai Higher People’s Court had to
exceptionally go through three hearings to handle the appeal case.
What is interesting is that the two anti-unfair competition GCsGuiding Case Nos. 29 and
1 See, e.g., China’s Chief Justice Warns of Weakness in Court System, available at