As a Lawyer, You Sent the Judge In?

Chapter 335: Administrative review guided by the Supreme Court—Rejection of protest!

 At the judgment seat.

 Peng Guangliang serves as the presiding judge of this trial.

 Faced with objections raised by other parties to the trial.

 Haven’t made too many reactions.

Why?

 Because he just stated that the review unit will not review it.

 Then it must be done in accordance with legal interpretation.

 When the collegial panel is conducting its deliberations, they have already conducted relevant discussions.

 The result of the discussion is that if only the plaintiff’s claim is dismissed.

 It needs to be taken into account that live broadcast hearings are currently being conducted.

This case involves a public topic, so the plaintiff’s claims cannot be directly and completely dismissed.

 Because that would have a negative impact on public opinion.

 Again.

 The factual evidence submitted by the plaintiff is conclusive.

The Health, Commerce and Industry and Food Inspectorate did have the circumstances stated in the appeal.

 Let’s not talk about anything else first.

What legal provisions were followed in rejecting Su Bai's appeal?

 How to reject a case that does not comply with the law?

 At this point, they would rather judge all the defendants in accordance with the provisions of the law.

  I don’t want to be mentioned because of this matter. Supervision and review.

 Although the administration has said hello, it still has issues with its own prospects.

They still know very clearly which one is lighter and which one is heavier.

 Dismiss the appeal request.

 At that time, it will still be their judges who will be in trouble.

 Based on this situation, the collegial panel discussed—

 In this court hearing, the hearing of the review department will not be reviewed.

  This has relevant legal provisions and legal interpretations.

According to the Supreme Court, the review authority procedurally rejected the review application.

 Applicant’s review decision and original administrative action.

 Only one can be chosen to litigate, and the specific case does not involve the issue of co-defendants.

 This is in accordance with the provisions of Article 48, Paragraph 1, Item 2 of the Implementation Regulations of the Administrative Reconsideration Law.

 Reject the application for administrative review.

 According to the provisions of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the "Supreme Court's Interpretation of Certain Issues on the Application of Administrative Litigation Law".

 The reconsideration authority specified in Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Administrative Litigation Law decides to uphold the original administrative action or reject the reconsideration application.

 The plaintiff can sue the original administrative act.

You can also sue the review unit for inaction and require the review unit to accept your application for review.

 No matter which path the prosecutor chooses, it does not involve the issue of another agency being a co-defendant.

 You cannot do both at the same time, you can only choose one of them.

 If the original administrative action and the reconsideration authority are sued at the same time.

 Violates the principle of bis indica and causes duplication of work by the court and the review unit.

 To put it simply, this is in accordance with the guidance of the Supreme Court.

How to file a lawsuit if it is believed that the reconsideration unit has failed to act and the administrative unit has failed to act.

The reconsideration unit and the administrative unit cannot be prosecuted at the same time.

As co-defendants, the two parties can only choose one party to conduct review, and the other party does not need to conduct review.

 In accordance with this legal provision, the collegial panel discussed the matter.

 The difficulty in handling this case is that the defendant has a review unit with a higher administrative level.

 In this case, let’s choose a soft persimmon.

So in accordance with the Supreme Court’s provisions on review and appeal of the Administrative Litigation Law, deciding to choose one is equivalent to saying that this problem has been solved.

 To put it bluntly, in a more popular way, it’s—

 The court has the right to decide whether to sue the administrative review unit or the administrative unit.

 You can only choose one of the two.

Since the plaintiff's lawsuit application cannot be dismissed or withdrawn, the defendant must be judged by other units.

after all.…

 According to what other units of the defendant stated, the administrative level of the reconsideration unit is relatively high.

Therefore, relevant judgments can only be made on the defendant’s industrial and commercial administration, food supervision and hygiene.

 Of course...all this is in compliance with legal procedures and legal interpretations.

.

 ….

 At the judgment seat.

 Faced with the dissatisfaction and objections raised by the defendant, Peng Guangliang directly dismissed them.

“The court will reject the objections raised by you, the defendant, industry and commerce, food supervision and health departments.”

 “According to the law as follows.”

“According to certain provisions of the Administrative Litigation Law promulgated by the Supreme Court, the administrative review unit and the defendant administrative department cannot be prosecuted jointly.”

 “You can only choose one.”

“Based on the guiding cases of the Supreme Court and relevant legal provisions, the defendant’s relevant claims are dismissed.”

Sitting on the defendant's seat is whether it is the person in charge of industry and commerce, the person in charge of health, or the person in charge of food inspection.

 All expressed dissatisfaction with this behavior.

Why?

 Because the three departments are not afraid of losing the case in a normal court trial.

 This is because there is an administrative review unit among the co-defendants sued in this court trial.

However, the court is now making a choice in accordance with certain provisions of the Supreme Court on administrative litigation.

So what happens next?

 What follows is certainly self-evident.

According to the defense just now, several departments they are accused of will definitely be judged.

 As the person in charge, he has a certain influence to a certain extent.

At this time, Yu Yan, who was sitting at the defendant's seat, opened his mouth to refute under the hint of the person in charge of industry and commerce.

“Presiding Judge, we would like to ask that the court makes its decision in accordance with certain provisions of the Supreme Court on administrative litigation and does not conduct additional review of the review unit.”

 “Then...why not reject it when the case is filed?”

 “Need to have a relevant dismissal at trial?”

 “So I don’t understand and don’t agree with this.”

 At the trial stage, Peng Guangliang looked at Yu Yan, did he disagree?

 What’s the use of disagreeing?

 I make a judgment in accordance with the law, do I need your consent?

 The reply made in accordance with certain provisions of the Supreme Court is already a legal interpretation.

 As for why the case was not dismissed when it was filed in the first place.

 It is also easy to answer this question.

“As for the question raised by the industrial and commercial lawyer entrusted by the defendant, the court gave a corresponding explanation.”

"first.…"

“The filing of a case is not confirmed by the collegial panel, but by the filing panel.”

“This is the work of the filing court, not the trial work of the collegial panel.”

“The collegial panel only advances and hears cases in accordance with relevant laws and the guidance and interpretation of the Supreme Court.”

 “So in response to the questions and protests raised by industrial and commercial lawyers.”

“The collegial panel shall make the relevant rejection.”

“If the defendant believes that the collegial panel made any mistakes in understanding and applying the law.”

“You can continue to file an appeal or directly submit it to supervisory review to determine that the court has made an error in application.”

“In this trial, the defendant is not allowed to make any further statements regarding the protest.” “The trial continues!”

 The hammer struck.

The heads of industry and commerce, health and food inspection in the defendant's seat all looked a bit unhappy.

But after asking the entrusted lawyer, whether such a violation was against the law.

 After learning that it was not against the law, I could only hold my breath.

Who makes the administrative level of his department not as high as that of the review unit?

If the administrative level on your side is high, the court may choose the review unit as the defendant.

 It’s just...

 The reconsideration unit is an administrative jurisdiction department that specializes in handling and supervising their units.

 So no matter how you think about it, their administrative level cannot be higher than that of the reconsideration unit.

 The trial is still continuing.

 For the above collegial panel, in accordance with certain provisions of the Supreme Court, it chose not to initiate relevant prosecutions against the review unit.

Su Bai also had no objection.

 Because this court hearing itself is to resolve the client’s litigation application.

 The reconsideration unit did not supervise the administrative unit, and indeed there was related slack behavior.

 There is no doubt about this.

 However—this court hearing decided not to conduct relevant review of the reconsideration unit.

  There is a legal basis.

 Having said that, if the review unit still does not supervise the case.

So what should we do?

  It is possible to submit the case to the court hearing separately for the reconsideration unit.

 It is enough to go to court together with other administrative units.

 This is also what the Supreme Court pointed out regarding the avoidance of duplication of work in reconsideration trials in the Administrative Litigation Law.

.

 …

　　　…

 Since the court has decided not to review the reconsideration unit during this court hearing.

Then the rest is much simpler...

 The next step is probably the court presentation and sentencing.

 Sure enough.

 It is the same as what Su Bai predicted.

 After the presiding judge strikes the hammer, he allows all parties to make court statements.

“As for this trial, the facts and evidence are clear.”

“The collegial panel has already understood the content of each party’s defense.”

 “The court statement will begin below.”

“Now let the plaintiff make a court statement.”

 As for the court statement, Su Bai didn't have much to say, because the facts were already very clear.

 This trial involved many parties.

Su Bai also made a statement based on the behavior of Dafa Supermarket and the laziness of its jurisdiction.

 “Presiding Judge.”

“Our court states as follows:”

“First of all, we believe that expired food sold by Dafa Supermarket has caused food poisoning in many infants and young children.”

“It has been involved in mass poisoning incidents caused by negligence.”

“So for Dafa Supermarket, we believe that our claims and other applications are reasonable requests.”

“Secondly, there are complaints against relevant departments such as industry and commerce, food inspection, and health.”

“In this trial, the defendant did not present any facts.”

“In addition, he even produced suspected forged evidence to escape his own inaction…”

 “What does this situation belong to?”

“After learning that several children were involved in eating expired food, the relevant sellers were still not punished.”

 “It has become a serious case of knowledge and inaction.”

“I would like to ask the responsible persons on the defendant’s side.”

“What is the reason for your inaction? Is it because you are afraid of taking responsibility?”

　　　….”

“In any case, the fact of inaction has been established.”

“Based on the above, we believe that the relevant persons in charge and relevant departments should be judged in accordance with the law.”

 “The above is our statement, the chief judge.”

 After Su Bai made relevant statements, the presiding judge asked the defendant to make a court statement.

 The court statement made by the defendant is relatively simple.

 The same sentence, because there is no fact of action, it seems particularly empty in terms of rebuttal and court statement.

 Even, the health department directly omitted the court statement.

 After all parties finished their presentations, Peng Guangliang glanced at Wang Xiang and Shen Jun.

 Then sound the hammer.

“All aspects of this trial have been completed.”

 “Now let’s announce the verdict!”

 Everyone stood up and listened to Peng Guangliang continue to read the verdict.

“In response to the plaintiff’s accusation that Dafa Supermarket sold expired food, it resulted in food poisoning claims and a public apology.”

“The collegial panel decided after deliberation, verification of facts and findings that Dafa Supermarket did sell expired food to the plaintiff, causing him food poisoning.”

“Dafa Supermarket should compensate the plaintiff, provide medical compensation, and make a public apology to Xiao Pingjun personally.”

“In addition...compensation for lost work time and other losses, the costs of this lawsuit will be borne by Dafa Supermarket.”

"and."

“The plaintiff in this court hearing has just decided not to review the lawsuit filed by the review department in accordance with several interpretations of administrative litigation given by the Supreme Court.”

 “No decision will be made at this time.”

“For industry and commerce, food inspection, and sanitation, the court determined that there were indeed relevant inactions.”

  “And the circumstances involved are serious.”

“Determine that industry and commerce, food inspection, sanitation, etc. respond to this incident within the specified time and resolve it.”

“And apologize to the person involved.”

“The respective litigation costs against the relevant departments shall be borne by the defendant department.”

 “The verdict is over!”

“If the parties to the trial have any objections to this trial, please file an appeal within the specified time, or initiate a supervisory review.”

 Dong dong dong!

 “Closed court!”

 As Peng Guangliang banged the hammer, the verdict of this trial was announced.

　　　…

This administrative litigation has finally been decided.

 The next step is to go to the most difficult implementation stage.

The difficulty of administration is that even if you win the lawsuit, it is also difficult to enforce it!

However, Su Bai was not too worried about this.

As long as the court makes a judgment, won’t the rest of the matter be easy to handle?

 Report it!

 Forged evidence, failed to act, deliberately covered up the fact of food poisoning, evaded relevant responsibilities, and turned a blind eye to the food poisoning of many infants and young children.

 The first two points above, one is the fact and the other is the result of the court’s judgment.

 The following are the major impacts.

 This kind of thing...how should I put it, submit it to the relevant department.

 It will be approved as soon as it is submitted!

 Perhaps many people can be dismissed from their posts...

.

 ….

 PS: Please give me a monthly ticket~

 (End of this chapter)