Article 209 of the Civil Procedure Law Under any of the following circumstances, the parties may apply to the People's Procuratorate for procuratorial suggestions or protests:
(a) the people's court rejected the application for retrial;
(two) the people's court fails to make a ruling on the retrial application within the time limit;
(3) There are obvious errors in the retrial judgment or ruling. The people's procuratorate shall, within three months, examine the application of the parties concerned and make a decision on whether to put forward procuratorial suggestions or protest. The parties may not apply to the people's procuratorate for procuratorial suggestions or protests again.
Extended data
Case:
Zhou and Zhou refused to accept the civil judgment No.806 of Zhanjiang Intermediate People's Court (20 12) and applied to Guangdong Higher People's Procuratorate for retrial. The Guangdong Higher People's Court made a civil ruling (20 13) No.302, rejecting Zhou's and Zhou's applications for retrial. Zhou,, refused to accept, and applied to the Zhanjiang Municipal People's Procuratorate for supervision. After the examination, the hospital submitted a protest to our hospital. Now the review is over.
We believe that this case does not meet the protest conditions stipulated in Articles 200, 208th and 209 of the Civil Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC). The reason for this is the following：
In the case of Zhou v. Zhou Nanrong, Zhou Qingwen, Zhanjiang Dazhou Iron and Steel Co., Ltd., Zhanjiang Huili Iron and Steel Co., Ltd., Suizhong Dazhou Wood Industry Co., Ltd. and Zhanjiang Mazhang Dazhou Wood Industry Co., Ltd. [i.e. (2007) Zhan Famin Zi No.7], Zhou requested in the indictment that the above five defendants be ordered to pay about 50% of their father's estate. After mediation, Rong and Zhou Qingwen.
The exhibition bank signed an agency contract with Zhou, stipulating that the exhibition bank would represent the case and Zhou would pay the lawyer service fee of 20,000 yuan to the exhibition bank; The supplementary terms of the contract stipulate that the money recovered by the lawyer of Dazhan shall be paid by Zhou and in proportion.
Article 11 of the Measures for the Administration of Lawyers' Service Fees issued by the National Development and Reform Commission of the People's Republic of China and the Ministry of Justice of the People's Republic of China on April 13, 2006 stipulates: "In handling civil cases involving property relations, if the client still asks for risk agency after learning the government guidance price, the lawyer service can be charged by risk agency. Except for the following circumstances: (1) Marriage inheritance cases …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
In 2006, Article 3 of the Implementation Measures of Guangdong Provincial Price Bureau and Justice Department for the Management of Lawyers' Service Charges stipulated: "The charging standard for civil and administrative litigation involving property: 1 0,000-8,000 yuan as the basic charging standard, and the amount of disputed subject matter is calculated and accumulated by stages in proportion: less than 50,000 yuan (including 50,000 yuan): no additional fees will be charged; 50,000-65,438+10,000 yuan (including 65,438+10,000 yuan): 8%; 65438+ 10,000-500,000 yuan (including 500,000 yuan): 5%; 500,000-6,543.8+0,000 yuan (including 6,543.8+0,000 yuan): 4%; 1 10,000-5 million (including 5 million): 3% ... "
According to the lawyer's service fee mentioned above, Zhou Yu's dispute in the (2007) Zhanminchuzi No.7 lawsuit is RMB 3 million, and the lawyer's service fee and basic fee payable to the exhibition office are higher than the lawyer's service fee agreed by both parties. Zhou, in the first instance of Japan case on 20 1 165438, stated that in the agency contract relationship of this case, they * * * paid the lawyer's agency fee of 40,000 yuan.
Although the final judgment calculated the lawyer service fee of 43,000 yuan per week according to the risk agency calculation standard agreed by both parties, the applicable law was wrong, but the lawyer service fee calculated according to the Implementation Measures for the Management of Lawyer Service Fee of Guangdong Provincial Price Bureau and Justice Department was still higher than the lawyer service fee determined by the court.
To sum up, the substantive handling of the final judgment is not unfavorable to Zhou and Zhou. Zhou's and Zhou's claims cannot be established. Our hospital decided not to support Zhou, Zhou and Zhou's application for supervision.
Guangdong Provincial People's Procuratorate-Decision on Not Supporting the Application for Supervision (Guangdong Inspection Word [20 14])