In order to establish a litigation system with procedural justice as the core and prevent judges from arbitrarily adjudicating the law, the Supreme Court has formulated a scientific and sharp "Provisions on the Causes of Action in Civil Litigation", which makes it mandatory for courts in all localities to list the causes of action for all cases, such as the case of Zhang San v. Li Si "Dispute over a Sales Contract", in which the six words "Dispute over a Sales Contract" are the cause of action, and one of the important roles of the cause of action is to restrict the judge handling the case from arbitrarily adjudicating the law by means of concealment.
In accordance with the types of civil rights and obligations stipulated in the Civil Code and other laws, the Supreme Court first divided all civil disputes into 11 categories of second-level causes of action, and then refined them into 473 ** causes of action. In other words, any civil dispute can be summarized as a specific cause of action, each of which has the statutory factual characteristics of the case and the corresponding provisions on the application of law. One of its objectives is to prevent the judge in charge of the case from pretending to be confused and violating the law.
A scientific cause of action is a powerful tool to curb judges from arbitrarily adjudicating crimes.
You can understand it this way, the 473 fine ** causes of action formulated by the Supreme People's Court are equivalent to 473 specific fine recipe names, and the judge is equivalent to the chef who is responsible for processing and making dishes in the kitchen. Because each of these 473 fine causes of action has significantly different characteristics and key identification nodes, if the judge handling the case deliberately confuses and makes an erroneous judgment that points the finger at the horse, then the mistake can easily be discovered by professionals such as procurators, higher-level judges, or lawyers under legal supervision, so as to facilitate judicial correction.
For example, if a customer asks your chef to make a braised beef, your chef will not be able to follow the "stewed yellow croaker" production procedure to make the braised beef, otherwise, your chef's incompetence will be immediately discovered. In the same way, if the litigation claims and evidentiary materials submitted by the parties to your judge point to the cause of action of "private lending disputes", then your judge cannot conduct a trial of the case according to the cause of action of "partnership agreement disputes", and then make a judgment of "partnership agreement disputes" or other inexplicable causes of action in troubled waters, which will inevitably be a perverse judgment that is substantially contrary to the facts.
Because the arbitrary judgment has been posted on the Internet for a long time, even if the error will not be discovered in a short period of time, it will be corrected by the continuous appeals of the parties or by various judicial supervision procedures at all levels. Justice may be late, but it will never be absent, and its mistakes will be discovered sooner or later. Unless the judge handling the case dies, as long as he is found to be wrong, he is likely to be investigated by the procuratorate for illegal trial or criminal responsibility for arbitrarily adjudicating the law.
Therefore, carefully reviewing the correctness of the cause of action in the judgment is an important way for you to identify whether the judge has arbitrarily decided.
In the future, we will continue to explain to you the various methods of identifying the judge's arbitrary judgment, and provide you with the necessary help.