Read more
This volume addresses the role of the judge and the parties in civil litigation in mainland China, Hong Kong and various European jurisdictions. It provides an overview and an analysis of how these respective roles have been changed in order to cope with growing caseloads and quality demands. It also shows the different approaches chosen in the jurisdictions covered.
Mainland China is introducing far-reaching reforms in its system of civil litigation. From an inquisitorial procedure, in which the parties play a relatively minor role, the country is changing to a more adversarial system with increased powers for the parties. At the same time, case management and the role of the judge as it is understood in mainland China remains different from case management and the role of the judge in Western countries, mainly as regards the limited powers of individual Chinese judges in this respect. Changes in China are justified by the ever-increasing case load of the Chinese courts and the consequent inability to deal with cases in an adequate manner, even though generally speaking Chinese courts still adjudicate civil cases within a relatively short time frame (this may, however, be problematic when viewed from the perspective of the quality of adjudication).
Growing caseloads and quality concerns may also be observed in various European states and Hong Kong. In these jurisdictions the civil procedural systems have a relatively adversarial character and it is some of the adversarial features of the existing systems of procedure which are felt to be problematic. Therefore, the lawmakers have opted for increasing the powers of the judge, often making the judge and the parties mutually responsible for the proper conduct of civil cases.
Starting from opposite directions, mainland China and the various European states and Hong Kong could meet half way in their reform attempts. This is, however, only possible if a proper understanding is fostered of the developments in these different parts of the World. Even though in both China and Europe the academic community and lawmakers are showing a keen interest in the relevant developments abroad, a study addressing the role of the judge and the parties in civil litigation in both China and Europe is still missing. This book aims to fill this gap in the existing literature.
List of contents
Acknowledgements.- List of Abbreviations.- About the Authors.- Table of Contents.- Introduction; C.H. (Remco) van Rhee and Fu Yulin.- Part 1 China: Mainland.- China: Mainland. Efficiency at the Expense of Quality?; Wang Yaxin and Fu Yulin.- Case Management in China's Civil Justice System; Cai Yanmin.- From 'Trial Management' to 'Case Management' in China; Wang Fuhua.- Part 2 China: Hong Kong.- China: Hong Kong. Selective Adoption of the English Woolf Reforms; Peter Chan, David Chan and Chen Lei.- Impact of Civil Justice Reform on Alternative Dispute Resolution: A Hong Kong Prospective; Christopher To.- Part 3 Austria and Germany.- Austria and Germany: A History of Successful Reforms; Andrea Wall.- The Austrian Model of Cooperation between the Judges and the Parties; Irmgard Griss.- 'Mediation Judges' in Germany: Mutual interference of EU standards and national developments; Burkhard Hess.- Part 4 Croatia.- Croatia: Omnipotent Judges as the Cause of Procedural Inefficiency and Impotence; Alan Uzelac.- Commercial Courts in Croatia and Case Management; Mario Vukelic.- Part 5 Italy.- Italy: Civil Procedure in Crisis; Elisabetta Silvestri.- Part 6 The Netherlands.- The Netherlands: A No-Nonsense Approach to Civil Procedure Reform; C.H. (Remco) van Rhee and Remme Verkerk.- Mediation: A Desirable Case Management Tool for the Courts?; Rob Jagtenberg.- Part 7 Romania.- Romania: Procedural reforms: Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose ; Serban Vacarelu and Adela Ognean.- ANNEX.- Case Management and Procedural Discipline in England and Wales: Fundamentals of an Essential new Technique; Neil Andrews.- Case Management in France; Emmanuel Jeuland.
Summary
This volume addresses the role of the judge and the parties in civil litigation in mainland China, Hong Kong and various European jurisdictions. It provides an overview and an analysis of how these respective roles have been changed in order to cope with growing caseloads and quality demands. It also shows the different approaches chosen in the jurisdictions covered.
Mainland China is introducing far-reaching reforms in its system of civil litigation. From an inquisitorial procedure, in which the parties play a relatively minor role, the country is changing to a more adversarial system with increased powers for the parties. At the same time, case management and the role of the judge as it is understood in mainland China remains different from case management and the role of the judge in Western countries, mainly as regards the limited powers of individual Chinese judges in this respect. Changes in China are justified by the ever-increasing case load of the Chinese courts and the consequent inability to deal with cases in an adequate manner, even though generally speaking Chinese courts still adjudicate civil cases within a relatively short time frame (this may, however, be problematic when viewed from the perspective of the quality of adjudication).
Growing caseloads and quality concerns may also be observed in various European states and Hong Kong. In these jurisdictions the civil procedural systems have a relatively adversarial character and it is some of the adversarial features of the existing systems of procedure which are felt to be problematic. Therefore, the lawmakers have opted for increasing the powers of the judge, often making the judge and the parties mutually responsible for the proper conduct of civil cases.
Starting from opposite directions, mainland China and the various European states and Hong Kong could meet half way in their reform attempts. This is, however, only possible if a proper understanding is fostered of the developments in these different parts of the World. Even though in both China and Europe the academic community and lawmakers are showing a keen interest in the relevant developments abroad, a study addressing the role of the judge and the parties in civil litigation in both China and Europe is still missing. This book aims to fill this gap in the existing literature.
