Respondents:
Purpose of the request:
Re-identify the forensic clinical judicial expertise certificate issued by a medical judicial expertise center to the respondent according to law.
Facts and reasons:
1. A medical appraisal center did not strictly follow the General Principles of Judicial Appraisal Procedure (Trial) to appraise the respondent, and there were serious violations.
First, it is illegal for the medical judicial authentication center to accept the entrustment of the respondent for judicial authentication.
Article 14 of the General Principles of Judicial Appraisal Procedure (Trial) stipulates that judicial appraisal institutions shall accept the entrustment of judicial organs and parties to arbitration cases. In litigation cases, judicial authentication institutions may also accept the entrustment of judicial authentication by the parties under the circumstances that the parties bear the burden of proof. When the parties entrust judicial expertise, it is generally carried out through a law firm. It is illegal for the medical judicial authentication center to authenticate the respondent without the designation of the judicial organ.
Two, a medical forensic center did not require the respondent to re-shoot to confirm the injury, and it was illegal to make an appraisal conclusion based on the X-ray film that did not indicate the shooting time and film number.
After rehabilitation treatment, the injury of the respondents can be improved. Qingdao Jiuding Medical Judicial Appraisal Center shall require the respondent to re-shoot according to the recovery situation and make an appraisal conclusion. In addition, the X-ray film provided by the respondent has no shooting time/date/film number, which cannot prove that it was taken for the respondent's injury. However, a medical forensic identification center determined the defendant's injury on this basis. What is the basis? ! !
Second, the court used forensic clinical judicial expertise, and the procedure was illegal.
When the applicant cross-examined the judicial expertise, he only said that he had no objection to the authenticity, but did not specify whether he had any objection to the content. The content of judicial expertise has not gone through the cross-examination procedure of the parties. According to the Civil Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), evidence without cross-examination cannot be used as the basis for deciding a case, and it is illegal for the court to adopt this procedure.
3. The applicant has the right to apply for re-appraisal of the appraisal conclusion made by the appraisal institution entrusted by the respondent unilaterally.
Article 26 of the Supreme People's Court's Provisions on Evidence in Civil Litigation stipulates that after the parties apply for identification with the consent of the people's court? Appraisal institutions and appraisers with appraisal qualifications shall be determined by both parties through consultation? If negotiation fails, it shall be designated by the people's court. Qingdao Jiuding Medical Judicial Appraisal Center was not determined through consultation between the applicant and the respondent, nor was it appointed by Laixi People's Court. According to the Supreme People's Court's Provisions on Evidence in Civil Proceedings,
Article 28 stipulates that the applicant has the right to apply for re-appraisal.
To sum up, in order to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the applicant and ensure judicial justice, we hereby apply for re-appraisal, and hope for approval.
I am here to convey
intermediate people's court
Applicant: