Legal analysis
After the expiration of the period of proof in the first instance and the trial, the appraisal was not put forward until the second instance. Obviously, the time limit for giving evidence has passed. Its essence is evidence raid, which violates the principle of good faith in civil litigation and is unfair to the other party, so it will not be allowed. New evidence refers to the newly discovered evidence after the trial of the original trial. If the parties have been allowed by the people's court to postpone the presentation of evidence, but due to objective reasons, they have not provided it within the permitted time limit, which may lead to unfair judgment, the evidence provided by the parties may be regarded as new evidence. "New evidence" means: (1) The new evidence in the procedure of first instance includes: the evidence newly discovered by the parties after the expiration of the time limit for adducing evidence in first instance; Evidence that the parties concerned cannot provide within the time limit for adducing evidence due to objective reasons, but cannot provide within the extended time limit with the permission of the people's court; (2) The new evidence in the second trial procedure includes: the newly discovered evidence after the first trial; If the party concerned fails to apply to the people's court for investigation and evidence collection after the expiration of the time limit for adducing evidence in the first instance, the court of second instance shall, after examination, consider that it should be allowed, and shall collect evidence according to the application of the party concerned. The following principles should be adhered to when dealing with the application for authentication put forward by the parties in the procedure of second instance: 1. Safeguard the litigation rights of the parties applying for authentication according to law. 2. Restrict the parties from applying for second-instance appraisal. 3. If the court of second instance considers that the reasons for the parties' application for appraisal are valid and should be appraised, it shall decide whether to directly appraise the case in the procedure of second instance or send the case back for retrial according to the specific circumstances of the case.
legal ground
Article 197 of the Criminal Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) During the court hearing, the parties, defenders and agents ad litem have the right to apply for notifying new witnesses to appear in court, for obtaining new material evidence, and for re-appraisal or inquest. Public prosecutors, parties, defenders and agents ad litem may apply to the court to notify people with specialized knowledge to appear in court and express their opinions on expert opinions. The court shall make a decision on whether to approve the above application. The relevant provisions on appraisers shall apply to persons with specialized knowledge appearing in court as stipulated in the second paragraph.
Decision of NPC Standing Committee on Amending the Civil Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC). The first paragraph of Article 179 is renumbered as Article 179 and amended as: "If a party's application is under any of the following circumstances, the people's court shall retry it:" (1) There is new evidence sufficient to overturn the original judgment or ruling; "(2) The basic facts identified in the original judgment or ruling are not proved by evidence;" (3) The main evidence of the facts ascertained in the original judgment or ruling is forged; "(4) The main evidence of the facts ascertained in the original judgment or ruling has not been cross-examined;" (five) the evidence needed for the trial of the case, the parties can not collect it by themselves due to objective reasons, and apply in writing to the people's court for investigation and collection, but the people's court has not investigated and collected it; "(6) The application of law in the original judgment or written order is indeed wrong;" (seven) in violation of the law, the jurisdiction is wrong; "(8) The composition of the judicial organization is illegal or the judge who should be withdrawn according to law fails to withdraw;" (9) A person without capacity for litigation does not have a legal representative, or the party who should participate in the litigation does not participate in the litigation due to reasons not attributable to him or his agent ad litem. (10) depriving the parties of the right to debate in violation of the law; (11) making a judgment by default without being summoned; "(12) The original judgment or ruling omits or exceeds the claim;" (thirteen) the legal documents on which the original judgment or ruling was based were revoked or changed. If the violation of legal procedures may affect the correct judgment or ruling of the case, or if the judges commit corruption, bribery, favoritism and perverting the law in the trial of the case, the people's court shall retry the case.