To No.1 Intermediate People’s Court, No.2 Intermediate People’s Court, No.3 Intermediate People’s Court, No.4 Intermediate People’s Court;

Beijing Internet Court and people’s courts of all districts:

In order to fully implement the requirements of the Supreme People's Court on the pilot program of the reform of separation between complicated cases and simple ones under Civil Procedure, according to Beijing High People’s Court Circular on the Pilot Program of the Reform of Separation between Complicated Cases and Simple Ones under Civil Procedure, the Judicial Committee of Beijing High People’s Court deliberated on and adopted the Implementation Rules for the Trial Work of Optimizing the Judicial Confirmation Procedure in Beijing Courts (Trial), Implementation Rules for the Trial Work of Small Claims Procedure in Beijing Courts (Trial), Implementation Rules for Improving Summary Civil Procedure in Beijing Courts (Trial), Implementation Rules for Expanding the Applicable Scope of the Sole-judge Trial System in Civil Proceedings (Trial), Regulation on Promoting the Intensive Delivery Work (Trial) and Implementation Rules on Electronic Litigation (Trail). The documents are hereby printed and distributed for implementation. For any problem encountered in the implementation, please report to Beijing High People’s Court in a timely manner.

It is hereby announced.

Attachment: Supporting Documents of Beijing High People’s Court on the Pilot Program of the Reform of Separation between Complicated Cases and Simple Ones under Civil Procedure

Beijing High People’s Court

March 9, 2020

Implementation Rules for the Trial Work of Optimizing the Judicial Confirmation Procedure in Beijing Courts (Trial)

To carry out the pilot reform of separation of cases into simple cases and complicated ones under civil procedure, optimize the judicial confirmation procedure, and improve the mechanism for resolving conflicts and disputes in connection with litigation and non-litigation, this Rules are formulated in accordance with the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Measures for the Implementation of the Pilot Reform of Separating Cases into Simple Cases and Complicated Ones under Civil Procedure issued by the Supreme People’s Court, and in light of the actual work situation.

Article 1 [Basic Principle] The judicial confirmation procedure shall adhere to the principle of combination of non-litigation mediation with legal confirmation, convenience with prevention of false litigation, and make full use of information technology to play the role of judicial confirmation procedure in quickly resolving disputes.

Article 2 [Establishment of List of Guest Mediation] The people’s courts at all levels shall, together with judicial administrative organs, relevant administrative organs and trade associations, establish and manage lists of guest mediation which shall include eligible mediation organizations and individuals who are engaged as guest mediation organizations or guest mediators according to the law. The list of guest mediators formulated by the high people’s court shall be applicable to all the people’s courts in Beijing. The lists of guest mediators formulated by the intermediate and basic people’s courts shall be submitted to the high people’s court for the record.

Article 3 [Review and Inclusion] People’s courts at all levels shall, together with judicial administrative organs, relevant administrative organs and trade associations, formulate procedures and standards for the selection and appointment of guest mediation organizations and guest mediators, review the qualifications of mediation organizations and guest mediators to be included in the lists, and publish the lists of guest mediation they have established.

Article 4 [Assessment Management] Guest mediation organizations and guest mediator shall be supervised and assessed by judicial administrative organs, relevant administrative organs and trade associations that have jointly establish the lists of guest mediation.

Guest mediation organizations and guest mediators in a people’s court shall be subject to daily management and performance assessment by the people’s court.

The people’s courts at all levels shall give feedback to the judicial administrative organs, relevant administrative organs and trade associations that have jointly establish the lists of guest mediation regarding the work of the guest mediation organizations and guest mediators in the courts’ lists.

Article 5 [Training and Guidance] Beijing courts shall establish a two-level training and guidance system for guest mediators. The high people’s court shall be responsible for the professional guidance and training of guest mediation organizations and guest mediators in all courts of the city, while the people’s courts shall be responsible for the training and guidance of their respective guest mediation organizations and guest mediators.

Article 6 [Exit Mechanism] People’s courts at all levels shall, in conjunction with judicial administrative organs, relevant administrative organs and trade associations, formulate measures for the management of the lists of guest mediation, and establish exit, dismissal and punishment mechanisms for guest mediation organizations and guest mediators.

Article 7 [Jurisdiction over Judicial Confirmation Cases] Jurisdiction over judicial confirmation cases shall be determined in accordance with the following provisions:

i. If mediation is appointed, the people’s court that has made the appointment shall have jurisdiction over judicial confirmation cases.

ii. If the parties choose to have the mediation conducted by a people’s mediation committee or a guest mediation organization, the basic people’s court in the place where the mediation organization is located shall have jurisdiction over the judicial confirmation cases; if the parties choose to have the mediation conducted by a guest mediator, the basic people’s court in the place where the mediation agreement is signed shall have jurisdiction over the judicial confirmation cases.

iii. If the parties jointly apply for judicial confirmation to two or more people’s courts that have jurisdiction over the case, the people’s court which first filed the case shall have jurisdiction over the case.

If a case conforms to the standards for hierarchical jurisdiction or special jurisdiction, it shall be under the jurisdiction of the corresponding intermediate people’s court or specialized people’s court.

If a case falls within the centralized jurisdiction by the Beijing No. 4 Intermediate People’s Court or the Beijing Internet Court, it shall be under the jurisdiction of the corresponding centralized jurisdiction court.

Article 8 [Classification of Judicial Confirmation] Judicial confirmation includes:

i. The judicial confirmation by the people’s court of the civil mediation agreement for the mediation appointed to a people’s mediation committee, a guest mediation organization or a guest mediator;

ii. The judicial confirmation by the people’s court of the civil mediation agreement for the mediation which the parties choose a people’s mediation committee, a guest mediation organization or a guest mediator to conduct.

Article 9 [Application and Time Limit for Judicial Confirmation Cases] If the parties apply for judicial confirmation, they shall jointly apply to the people’s court for judicial confirmation within 30 days from the effective date of the mediation agreement.

The people’s mediation committee, the guest mediation organization or the guest mediator may instruct the two parties to file an application at the time of reaching a mediation agreement.

Article 10 [Application Materials to Be Submitted for Judicial Confirmation] If the parties apply for judicial confirmation after reaching a mediation agreement, they shall submit to the people’s court an application for judicial confirmation, a mediation agreement, the original documents of the proofs used by the people’s conciliation committee, the guest mediation organization or the guest mediator to conduct mediation, as well as copies of the property rights certificates and other proofs related to the mediation agreement, together with their originals for verification. Additionally, the confirmation of address for service shall be filled in, providing the identity, residence, contact information and other basic information of both parties.

Where an agent is authorized to apply for judicial confirmation, the party concerned shall submit to the people’s court, in addition to the above-mentioned materials, a power of attorney signed or sealed by the party, and the identity, residence, contact information and other basic information of the agent. When necessary, the people’s court may request the party to go through the authorization formalities in person.

The party may submit its application materials to the people’s court through the people’s mediation committee, the guest mediation organization or the guest mediator. The people’s mediation committee, the guest mediation organization or the guest mediator shall assist the party in uploading application materials through the Beijing Court Mediation Platform (the party end) in the Beijing Court Integrated Platform for Separation of Cases, Diversified Mediation, Fast Trial and Ruling, and filing an online application for judicial confirmation.

Article 11 [Content of Written Commitment] The parties shall, in the application for judicial confirmation, explicitly commit themselves in writing to the following contents:

i. The parties reach an agreement voluntarily for the purpose of resolving the dispute, and are not involved in malicious collusion or circumvention of the law;

ii. The mediation agreement does not violate the mandatory provisions of laws or administrative regulations;

iii. The mediation agreement does not infringe upon the interests of the state, the public interest or the legitimate rights and interests of any person not involved in the case;

iv. If the content of the mediation agreement causes damage to the state, the collective or others, the party concerned is willing to bear the corresponding civil liability and other legal liabilities.

If the application for judicial confirmation submitted by a party does not contain the above-mentioned written commitment, the people’s court shall require the party to amend the written commitment or submit another written commitment.

Article 12 [Acceptance of Judicial Confirmation Cases] The people’s court shall, within three days after receiving the application for judicial confirmation from the party concerned, decide whether to accept it or not. The people’s court may accept immediately the application for judicial confirmation of a case that is mediated as appointed by the court, which is guided or pre-reviewed by the people’s court in the course of mediation, or for which both parties jointly apply to the court for judicial confirmation, provided that legal provisions are met.

The people’s court does not charge fees for accepting application for judicial confirmation.

Article 13 [Rejection of Judicial Confirmation Cases] When a party applies for judicial confirmation of a mediation agreement, the people’s court shall rule not to accept the application under any of the following circumstances:

i. The case does not fall within the scope of acceptance by the people’s court;

ii. The case is not under the jurisdiction of the people’s court which has received the application;

iii. The application is filed to confirm marital, parent-child, adoptive or other relations are invalid, valid or dissolved;

iv. Other special procedure, procedure of service by publication, or bankruptcy procedure may apply;

v. The mediation agreement involves the confirmation of property rights or intellectual property rights;

vi. The application involves any case that is not within the scope of judicial confirmation.

The people’s court shall, after accepting the application, make a ruling to reject the party’s application if it finds any of the above-mentioned circumstances.

Article 14 [Organization of Review of Judicial Confirmation Cases] After accepting the application for judicial confirmation, the people’s court shall appoint a fast-track judge to review the mediation agreement. A collegial panel shall be formed to review major judicial confirmation cases involving large amounts of subjects accepted by intermediate people’s courts and specialized people’s courts.

Article 15 [Review of Judicial Confirmation Cases] The people’s court may review the mediation agreement in writing.

During review, the people’s court shall focus on the authenticity of the basic legal relationship and whether the mediation agreement is harmful to the interests of the state, the public interest or the legitimate rights and interests of any person not involved in the case.

The people’s court may, when necessary, notify both parties to be present at the same time and inquire the parties in person. A party shall truthfully state to the people’s court the relevant circumstances concerning the mediation agreement for which it has applied for confirmation, and undertake that the proof materials submitted are true and lawful. If, after review, the people’s court considers that the statement or proof materials provided by the party are insufficient, incomplete or doubtful, it may require the party to supplement the statement or proof materials within a time limit. When necessary, the people’s court may verify the relevant information with the mediation organization. If the party fails to supplement its statement or proof materials within the time limit without justifiable reasons or refuses to accept inquiries, the people’s court may handle the case as if the application has been withdrawn.

Article 16 [Time Limit for Hearing Judicial Confirmation Cases] The people’s court shall conclude a case within 30 days from the day of filing the case. The extension shall be approved by the president of the court if it is necessary under special circumstances.

The people’s court may make an immediate ruling whether to confirm a case that is mediated as appointed by the court, that is guided by the people’s court in the course of mediation, or for which both parties jointly apply to the court for judicial confirmation.

Article 17 [Withdrawal of Application for Judicial Confirmation] If a party withdraws its application before the ruling confirming the mediation agreement is made, the people’s court shall give its permission to such withdraw.

Article 18 [Ruling to Confirm Judicial Confirmation Cases] If the conditions for confirmation are met after review, the people’s court shall make a ruling to confirm the validity of the mediation agreement. The ruling shall become legally effective after it is served on both parties. If one party refuses to perform the ruling or fails to perform the ruling in full, the other party may apply to the people’s court for execution.

Article 19 [Ruling to Reject Judicial Confirmation Cases] The people’s court shall, upon review, rule to reject the application if the mediation agreement:

i. Violates the mandatory provisions of the law;

ii. Harms the interests of the state, the public interest or the legitimate rights and interests of others;

iii. Violates the public order and good customs;

iv. Violates the principle of voluntariness;

v. Has ambiguous content;

vi. Has other circumstances where judicial confirmation cannot be made.

Article 20 [Online Handling of Judicial Confirmation Cases] The people’s court can accept the application materials submitted by the parties through the Beijing Court Integrated Platform for Separation of Cases, Diversified Mediation, Fast Trial and Ruling, and can conduct case filing and review, inquire the parties, implement judicial confirmation, and serve judgment documents through the online judicial confirmation function of the platform.

Article 21 [Remedy Method] If a party or a stakeholder considers that there is a mistake in a ruling made by a people’s court confirming the mediation agreement, it may raise an objection to the people’s court. If a party has any objection, it shall raise it within 15 days from the date of receiving the ruling. If a stakeholder has any objection, it shall raise it within six months from the date when it knew or should know that its civil rights and interests had been infringed upon.

Article 22 [Legal Liability for False Mediation] If, in a case of judicial confirmation accepted by a people’s court, a party is found to have forged evidence, made a false statement, invented a civil dispute or otherwise conducted false mediation, the party shall be fined or detained according to the seriousness of the circumstance.

Where a guest mediation organization or a guest mediator participates in or assists in a false mediation, the people’s court shall correct the case and remove the guest mediation organization or the guest mediator from the list of guest mediation. Where a people’s mediation committee or its subordinate people’s mediators participate in or assist in a false mediation, the judicial administrative organ or the relevant department or organization shall deal with the case in accordance with laws, regulations and rules.

Where a false mediation infringes upon the civil rights and interests of others, the participants in the false mediation shall bear the liability for compensation. Where the act of false mediation is suspected of a criminal offense, the people’s court shall transfer the relevant clues and case materials to the investigation organ in accordance with the law.

Article 23 [Coordination and Communication of Judicial Confirmation] The people’s court may, on a regular or irregular basis, notify the judicial administrative organ at the corresponding level, the relevant administrative organ or the people’s mediation committee of the confirmation of the mediation agreement, the existing problems and the suggestions.

Article 24 [Judicial Confirmation of Administrative Mediation] This Rules shall apply to the judicial confirmation procedure whereby the parties choose an administrative organ to mediate and reach a civil mediation agreement.

Article 25 [Interpretation and Date of Implementation] This Rules shall be interpreted by the Beijing High People’s Court and shall be put into trial implementation from the date of promulgation.

Implementation Rules for the Trial Work of Small Claims Procedure in Beijing Courts (Trial)

To further expand the application of small claims procedure, strengthen the advantages of small claims procedure, improve trial quality and efficiency, and meet the people’s judicial needs for efficient, convenient and authoritative dispute resolution, this Rules is formulated in accordance with the Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress on Authorizing the Supreme People’s Court to Carry out a Pilot Reform of Separation of Cases into Simple Cases and Complicated Ones under Civil Procedure in Certain Regions, the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Interpretations of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Plan for the Trial Reform of Separation of Cases into Simple Cases and Complicated Ones under Civil Procedure, and the Measures for the Implementation of the Pilot Reform of Separating Cases into Simple Cases and Complicated Ones under Civil Procedure, and in light of the actual work of civil adjudication in Beijing.

Article 1 [Guiding Principle] The small claims procedure shall adhere to the principle of combination between justice and efficiency, between legal application and agreed application, and between simplification of proceedings and no damage to litigious right of the parties, so as to give full play to the function of quickly resolving disputes.

Article 2 [Applicable Subject Matter] The small claims procedure shall be applied to a civil case tried by a basic people’s court in which the facts are clear, the relationship between rights and obligations is clear, and there is little dispute over a simple pecuniary payment, and the amount of the subject matter is less than RMB 50,000, and the first instance shall be final judgment.

The small claims procedure may be applied to a civil case involving simple pecuniary payment of more than RMB 50,000 but less than RMB 100,000 for the subject matter, provided that the parties agree to apply the small claims procedure. If there is no agreement between the parties, the judge shall solicit the opinions of both parties on whether or not to agree to the application of the small claims procedure and shall make a written record thereof.

Article 3 [Calculation of Amount of Subject Matter] The amount of the subject matter specified in Article 2 of this Rules refers to the amount of claims made by the parties at the time of filing a lawsuit.

For the amount of liquidated damages or interests that have been incurred on a continuous basis or for which a specific method of calculation exists, the amount specified by the parties up to the date of filing the lawsuit shall be the subject matter amount.

Article 4 [Exclusions] The following cases shall not be tried by the small claims procedure:

i. Disputes over personal relations and property rights confirmation;

ii. Civil disputes involving foreign affairs, and affairs of Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan;

iii. Disputes that require evaluation or appraisal or that have objections to the evaluation or appraisal results before litigation;

iv. A dispute in which one of the parties is unaccounted for;

v. Other disputes which are not suitable for trial by the small claims procedure.

Article 5 [Case Marking] When filing a case for registration, a case-filing judge shall, in accordance with Articles 2 and 4 of this Rules, mark the cases in the trial management system to which the small claims procedure shall apply, for the purpose of separating cases under applicable procedures.

Article 6 [Rights Notification] The people’s court shall inform the parties of the trial organization, the time limit for trial, the way of trial, the first instance as final judgment and other relevant matters, regarding the cases to which the small claims procedure shall apply.

Article 7 [Service of Summons] In cases where the small claims procedure is applicable, the parties may be summoned, documents be served or evidence be exchanged by telephone, E-mail, fax or SMS, but the litigation rights of the parties to state, defend, provide evidence, cross-examine and debate shall not be diminished.

Article 8 [Objection to Jurisdiction] Where a party objects to the jurisdiction of a small claims case, the people’s court shall make a ruling. The ruling shall take effect as soon as it is made.

If, upon examination, the court finds that the objection to the jurisdiction of the party is untenable, it may make an oral ruling and record it in writing or by sound recording or video recording. If the court considers that the objection to jurisdiction is tenable, it shall make a written ruling.

Article 9 [Adducing Evidence and Defense] For a case in which the small claims procedure is applicable, the people’s court may hold a court session directly if the parties expressly waive the defense period or the time limit for adducing evidence provided that the parties have been notified by the people’s court of the legal consequences of the waiver of the defense period or the time limit for adducing evidence.

If the parties expressly state that they will not waive the defense period, the people’s court may, on the basis of obtaining the consent of the parties, reasonably determine the defense period which generally shall not exceed seven days.

If the parties expressly indicate that they will not waive the time limit for adducting evidence, the time limit for adducting evidence may be agreed upon by the parties themselves or designated by the people’s court, but generally shall not exceed seven days.

Article 10 [Trial in Court] In cases where the small claims procedure is applicable, the trial may be conducted without being restricted by court investigation, court debate or other trial procedures, and directly centered on the claims or elements of the cases. In principle, the trial shall be concluded at one session, except where the people’s court deems it necessary to hold another session.

With the consent of both parties, a case involving the small claims procedure may be heard in court by means of remote audio-visual transmission technology when necessary. Court clerk’s court transcripts can be replaced by court audio and video recordings.

Article 11 [Time Limit of Trial] The trial of a case in which the small claims procedure is applied shall be concluded within two months from the date of filing the case. If special circumstances require an extension, the trial may be extended by one month upon the approval of president of the people’s court.

The period during which the parties file an objection to the jurisdiction is not included in the time limit of trial.

Where there are other provisions in the laws or judicial interpretations concerning the deduction of time limit of trial, such provisions shall prevail.

Article 12 [Procedure Change] In a case involving the small claims procedure, if one of the following circumstances occurs and the conditions for summary procedure are met, a ruling shall be made that the case shall be remitted to trial by summary procedure:

i. A party considers that the case does not conform to the provisions of Articles 2 and 4 of this Rules concerning the application of small claims procedure, and before the hearing begins, submits an objection to the people’s court which, upon examination, finds that the objection is tenable;

ii. A party applies for the addition or alteration of the claims or addition of parties, resulting in the amount of the subject matter of the case exceeding RMB 50,000 but less than RMB 100,000, and the other party does not agree to continue to apply the small claims procedure;

iii. A party applies for the addition or alteration of the claims or the addition of parties, resulting in the amount of the subject matter of the case exceeding RMB 100,000 or in the failure to meet other applicable conditions for the small claims procedure;

iv. A party files a counterclaim;

v. Appraisal, evaluation or audit is required;

vi. Other circumstances where it is inappropriate to continue to apply the small claims procedure.

In a case where the small claims procedure is applied to the trial, if it is found that the case is complicated and the summary procedure is not suitable for the trial, a ruling shall be made that the case shall be remitted to trial by ordinary procedure. Cases undergoing a change from the small claims procedure to the summary procedure are generally not allowed to be remitted to trial by the ordinary procedure, except where it is really necessary.

As for the scope of cases that shall undergo a change from the small claims procedure to the ordinary procedure, Article 8 of the Implementation Rules of the Beijing High People’s Court for Improving the Summary Procedure of Civil Litigation (Trial) shall apply.

The ruling requiring a change to the summary procedure may be made orally or in writing. Where an oral ruling is made, it shall be recorded by way of written record or sound recording.

Before a case involving the small claims procedure undergoes a change to the summary procedure or the ordinary procedure, the facts confirmed by the parties may no longer be proved or cross-examined.

Article 13 [Approval of Procedure Change] If a case involving the small claims procedure needs to be tried in summary or ordinary procedure, the procedure change shall be reported to the president of the people’s court for approval within three days after the occurrence of the cause of procedure change, or no later than seven days before the expiration of the time limit of trial.

If a case involving the small claims procedure has a complicated situation, which requires the application of ordinary procedure, and the case is transferred from the front-end case filing and speedy-trial team to the back-end trial team for trial, the handling judge shall submit the application for procedure change within two working days after the occurrence of the cause for procedure change, and submit it to the president of the people’s court for approval.

If, after approval, the ruling is made requiring the change to the summary or ordinary procedure, a mark shall be made in the trial management system.

Article 14 [Procedure Change-over] If, at the time of filing the case, the summary procedure is applied due to the fact that the mark of the subject matter amount specified in the second paragraph of Article 2 of this Rules is met, and both parties agree to apply the small claims procedure during the hearing, or, if the case meets the applicable conditions set forth in the first and second paragraphs of Article 2 of this Rules due to the change of the party’s claims, and the case is remitted to trail by the small claims procedure, a mark shall be made in the trial management system.

Article 15 [Simplification of Judgment Documents] In cases where the small claims procedure is applied, the judgment documents may be further simplified according to the summary procedure, which mainly contain the parties’ basic information, litigation claims, defense opinions, main facts, brief reasons for the judgment, the basis of the judgment, the main text of the judgment, the notification of the first instance as final judgment, and the burden of litigation costs.

In simple cases where the application of the laws is clear, the judge can make a judgment in court and explain the reasons for the judgment. Where a case is being adjudicated in court and the adjudication process has been completely recorded by sound recording or video recording or court transcripts, the people’s court may, when making the judgment documents, no longer state the reasons for the judgment.

Simplified forms of judgment documents will be issued separately.

Article 16 [Trial Team] The basic people’s court shall reasonably allocate trial resources according to the actual situation of the court, and set up a trial team to hear small claims cases.

Article 17 [Litigation Costs] In cases where the small claims procedure is applied, the litigation costs shall be charged by half as prescribed in Article 16 of the Measures for the Payment of Litigation Costs.

Article 18 [Remedy Procedure] If a party considers that there is a mistake in a legally effective judgment or ruling of a small claims case, it may apply to the court of its original trial or the court at the next higher level for a retrial in accordance with the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China and the relevant provisions of its judicial interpretation.

If the court at the next higher level, upon examination, considers that the party’s application meets the retrial conditions and orders a retrial, or initiates the trial supervision procedure in accordance with its functions and powers, or a procuratorate at the next higher level lodges a protest is lodged to a court at the same level, the court at the next higher level shall order the court of original trial to retry the case.

Article 19 [Assessment] The application of small claims procedure shall be included in the assessment scope of the target-oriented responsibility system as an important indicator of the trial performance of people’s courts and judges.

If a party files a complaint or a petition about the application of the small claims procedure without a justifiable reason, such complaint or petition shall not be included in the assessment scope of the people’s court or the judge concerned.

Article 20 [Interpretation and Date of Implementation] This Rules shall be interpreted by the Beijing High People’s Court and shall be put into trial implementation from the date of promulgation.

Implementation Rules for Improving Summary Civil Procedure in Beijing Courts (Trial)

To expand the application of summary procedure, improve the procedure setting, promote the separation of cases into simple cases and complicated ones, trivial cases and major ones, and summary trial cases and ordinary ones, realize the quick trial of simple cases and the intensive trial of complicated cases, and meet the people’s needs for diversified, efficient and convenient dispute resolution, this Rules are formulated in accordance with the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress on Authorizing the Supreme People’s Court to Carry out a Pilot Reform of Separation of Cases into Simple Cases and Complicated Ones under Civil Procedure in Certain Regions, the Interpretations of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Plan for the Trial Reform of Separation of Cases into Simple Cases and Complicated Ones under Civil Procedure, and the Measures for the Implementation of the Pilot Reform of Separating Cases into Simple Cases and Complicated Ones under Civil Procedure, and in light of the actual work of civil adjudication in Beijing.

Article 1 [Principle of Application] The provisions of this Rules shall apply to simple civil cases heard by the basic people’s courts in which the facts are clear, the relationship between rights and obligations is clear, and there is little dispute.

Article 2 [Scope of Application] The summary procedure may be applied to the following cases:

i. A model judgment has already been made in effect in a similar case;

ii. Service by publication is required in a simple civil case where the facts are clear, the relationship between rights and obligations is clear, and there is little dispute;

iii. The facts are clear, the rights and obligations are clear, and an appraisal is conducted to determine the standard of compensation and the value of property.

Model judgment means that in dealing with mass civil disputes, the people’s court selects cases with common and representative factual and legal disputes to be tried first, and makes judgments that are exemplary and instructive to similar cases.

Article 3 [Exclusions] the summary procedure shall not apply to the following cases:

i. A case that is remanded for retrial;

ii. One party involves a lot of people and the case is complicated;

iii. The trial supervision procedure is applicable;

iv. A case involves the interests of the state or the public interest;

v. A third party brings a suit to request the alteration or revocation of an effective judgment, ruling or mediation letter;

vi. Other cases where the summary procedure is not applicable.

Article 4 [Circumstances for Not Reviewing Objection to Jurisdiction] Where a party raises an objection to jurisdiction under any of the following circumstances, the people’s court shall not review it according to the law, and shall notify the party of the reason and record it in the written record:

i. A higher court designates jurisdiction over a case;

ii. Other cases for which the court has decided on the transfer of jurisdiction;

iii. A case of execution objection proceeding accepted by the executive court;

iv. The defendant raises an objection to jurisdiction beyond the time limit of defense;

v. A third party in a case raises an objection to jurisdiction;

vi. The defendant in the counterclaim raises a jurisdictional objection to the counterclaim.

Article 5 [Simplified Trial Procedures] In cases where the summary procedure is applicable, the people’s court may, in light of the circumstances of the cases, adopt the following methods to simplify the trial procedures, but shall protect the parties’ litigation rights such as defense, adducing evidence, cross-examination, statement and debate:

i. Where a party’s identity verification, rights and obligations notification, or disciplinary declaration at a court session have been completed by a pre-trial conference or by other means before the court session, these procedures may not be repeated at the court session;

ii. Adducing evidence or cross-examination is not necessary for the undisputed facts and evidence recorded in the transcripts of the pre-trial conference;

iii. A court hearing may combine the court investigation with the court debate and proceed directly around the claims or elements of the case.

Article 6 [Simplified Judgment Documents] in cases where the summary procedure is applicable, the people’s court may adopt the following methods to simplify the judgment documents:

i. If the fixed elements of the case can be summarized, the opinions of the plaintiff and the defendant, the evidence, the reasons for the court’s determination, the basis and the result of the judgment may be stated in accordance with the elements of the case;

ii. If a party expressly acknowledges the other party’s claims in whole or in principal, or the parties have no or little dispute over the facts of the case, the judgment documents may contain only the basic information of the parties, the claims, the defense opinions, the main facts, the brief reasons for the judgment, the basis of the judgment and the main text of the judgment;

iii. The element-type judgment documents can adopt the format already published by the Beijing Court Integrated Platform for Separation of Cases, Diversified Mediation, Fast Trial and Ruling.

The simplified judgment documents shall contain such necessary contents as the burden of litigation cost, the notification of appeal to the parties, and the penalty for late performance.

Simplified forms of judgment documents will be issued separately.

Article 7 [Extension of Time Limit of Trial] A people’s court shall conclude a case in which the summary procedure is applied within three months from the date of filing the case. If special circumstances require an extension, the trial may be extended by one month upon the approval of president of the court.

The period of publication shall not be included in the time limit of trial.

Article 8 [Procedure Change] In a case where the summary procedure is applicable, the ruling shall be made to change to the ordinary procedure if one of the following circumstances occurs:

i. The case involves the interests of the state or the public interest;

ii. The case involves a mass dispute that may affect social stability;

iii. The case has a great social impact and is of widespread concern to the people;

iv. The case is new or complicated;

v. There may be a conflict with the effective judgments of the people’s court or the people’s court at a higher level;

vi. The case becomes complicated because the plaintiff changes or adds claims or the defendant files a counterclaim;

vii. It is difficult to conclude the case within three months because the party concerned has applied to the court for obtaining evidence or has applied for witnesses to appear in court.

Article 9 [Time Limit of Procedure Change] In cases where the summary procedure is applicable, the people’s court may, in light of the specific circumstances, decide to extend the time limit of trial or to make a ruling for trial by the ordinary procedure. The people’s court shall make a corresponding decision within five days after the occurrence of the cause of procedure change, or no later than seven days before the expiration of the time limit of trial.

If a case involving the summary procedure has a complicated situation, which requires the application of ordinary procedure, and the case is transferred from the front-end speedy-trial team to the back-end trial team for trial, the handling judge shall submit the application for procedure change within two working days after the occurrence of the cause for procedure change, and submit it to the president of the court for approval.

Where a decision is made to extend the time limit of trial or a ruling is made to change to the ordinary procedure, the decision to extend the time limit of trial shall be made public to the parties in a timely manner in accordance with the Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on the Publication of Information on the Judicial Process on the Internet by People’s Courts; the ruling to change to the ordinary procedure may be made orally or in writing. In the case of an oral ruling, it shall be included in the written record and appended to a file.

Article 10 [Interpretation and Date of Implementation] This Rules shall be interpreted by the Beijing High People’s Court and shall be put into trial implementation from the date of promulgation.

Beijing High People’s Court Implementation Rules for Expanding the Applicable Scope of the Sole-judge Trial System in Civil Proceedings (Trial)

To carry out the pilot reform of separation of cases into simple cases and complicated ones under civil procedure, and further clarify the specific circumstances and corresponding procedures for expanding the application scope of sole-judge trial in civil proceedings, these implementation rules are formulated in accordance with the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Measures for the Implementation of the Pilot Reform of Separating Cases into Simple Cases and Complicated Ones under Civil Procedure issued by the Supreme People’s Court, and in light of the actual work situation.

Chapter I General Regulations

Article 1 [Overall objective] Meet people’s needs for diverse, efficient and convenient dispute resolution, ensure that people can feel fairness and justice in every judicial case, and simultaneously improve the quality, efficiency and credibility of trials.

Article 2 [Basic meaning] The sole-judge system refers to a litigation system in which one person hears and judges a specific case. A sole judge belongs to the statutory trial organization form in which the sole-judge trial applies. When a sole judge hears a case, he/she exercises the same power as the presiding judge.

Where related conditions are met, the sole judge can hear the first-instance case tried by the people's court at the basic level, and the case on appeal accepted by the second-instance people's court.

For cases tried by the sole judge, the general procedures, summary procedures and small claims procedures, etc., may apply, unless otherwise specified by law.

Article 3 [Basic principles] To expand the application scope of the sole-judge trial system in civil proceedings, the following principles should prevail:

(i) Adhere to people orientation. We will always start from continuously meeting people's judicial needs, and strive to promote the unity of protecting people's legal rights and interests, and improving the judicial efficiency.

(ii) Adhere to due process. We will handle cases in strict accordance with the law to ensure that the proceedings are fair and impartial. We will further clarify the interpretation and notification obligations of the people's court, and fully respect the parties' right to choose procedures.

(iii) Adhere to the separation of trial organizations and trial procedures. We will use different trial organizations and corresponding trial procedures accurately according to the type and complexity of the case.

(iv) Adhere to effective supervision. We will strengthen the supervision and management of the sole-judge trial, and constantly improve the supporting mechanism of trial management and supervision, to ensure orderly decentralization and effective supervision.

Chapter II Applicable Scope of Sole-Judge Trial

Article 4 [Application scope of sole-judge trial at basic people’s courts]The sole judge will hear the cases for which the small claims procedures and summary procedures apply at basic people’s courts.

The following cases tried by the basic people's court may be tried by a sole judge according to general procedures:

(i) Simple cases that need to go through time-consuming procedures such as evaluation, appraisal, audit, investigation and evidence collection about the facts, but there are clear governing laws;

(ii) Simple cases that are transferred to general procedures because procedural matters such as service exceed the trial limit.

(iii) Other cases with facts difficult to ascertain, but there are clear governing laws.

Article 5 [Application scope of sole-judge trial at second-instance people's court] The people's court of second instance shall form a collegial panel for the trial of a case on appeal. However, the cases with clear facts and governing laws may be tried by a judge alone:

(i) In the first instance, the summary procedure is applied for hearing and closing the case;

(ii) Disagree with the civil ruling.

Article 6 [Circumstances where the case can’t be tried by a sole judge]For cases that are tried by the basic people's courts and fall under one of the following circumstances, a collegial panel shall be established according to law and the general procedures for trial shall apply:

(i) They involve national interests and public interests;

(ii) They involve mass disputes that may affect social stability;

(iii) They have a greater social impact and draw wide attention from the masses;

(iv) They belong to new or complex types;

(v) They may conflict with the judgment of this court or the people's court at a higher level that is already in force;

(vi) They are sent back to retrial;

(vii) Where the trial supervision procedures apply;

(viii) The third party sues and requests to change or revoke the judgment, ruling, or mediation letter already in force;

(ix) Other cases where the sole-judge system is not suitable.

The first-instance cases tried by a people's court of second instance may not be tried by a judge alone.

Chapter III Mode of the Sole-judge Trial

Article 7 [Modes of the sole-judge trial applicable at the basic people's courts] The trial modes for cases tried by a judge alone at basic people's courts shall be determined according to the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Measures for the Implementation of the Pilot Reform of Separating Cases into Simple Cases and Complicated Ones under Civil Procedure issued by the Supreme People’s Court, and relevant provisions concerning the trial procedures specified in the Implementation Rules of Beijing Courts for the Reform of Separating Cases into Simple Cases and Complicated Ones under Civil Procedure.

Article 8 [Application scope of sole trial at people’s courts of second instance] Cases on appeal to be tried by a judge alone shall be properly heard in court.

In cases where no new facts or evidences have been submitted, if they fall under any of the following circumstances and the sole judge determines the trial doesn’t not need to be held after reviewing, investigating, or inquiring the parties, such cases may not be heard:

(i) Disagree with the civil ruling;

(ii) The appeal request is obviously untenable;

(iii) The original ruling is made on clear facts, but the applicable law is obviously wrong;　　

(iv) The original ruling seriously violates the statutory procedures, and a retrial is needed.

Article 9 [Period and judgment documents of sole-judge trial] The period and judgment documents for cases tried by a judge alone shall be determined according to the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Measures for the Implementation of the Pilot Reform of Separating Cases into Simple Cases and Complicated Ones under Civil Procedure issued by the Supreme People’s Court, and relevant provisions concerning the trial procedures specified in the Implementation Rules of Beijing Courts for the Reform of Separating Cases into Simple Cases and Complicated Ones under Civil Procedure.

Chapter IV Switch between the Sole-judge Trial System and Collegial Panel System

Article 10 [Circumstances for changing trial organizations] For cases of the first or second instance that are tried by a judge alone, if one of the circumstances listed in Paragraphs (1) to (5) and (9) of Article 6 of this Rules occurs during the trial, it shall be ruled that a collegial panel shall be formed for the trial, and the members of the collegiate panel and related matters shall be notified to both parties in writing. The original sole judge shall continue to participate in the trial.

Article 11 [Change of trial organizations based on the trial supervision and management of the court president or division chief judge] Where the court president or division chief judge holds that this case shall be tried by the collegial panel because it falls under any of the circumstances listed in Paragraphs (2) and (4) to (5) of Article 6 of these Implementation Measures, the trial organization may be changed upon approval of the court president or division chief judge. The court president or division chief judge may participate in the trial of the case when necessary.

Article 12 [Change of trial organizations due to illegal trial acts of the sole judge]Where relevant entities or individuals report the judge’s illegal acts during trial and the people’s court confirms such illegal acts after verification, the members or forms of the trial organization may be adjusted upon approval of the court president.

Article 13 [The parties’ right to raise an objection to trail organizations]If one or both parties raise an objection to the sole-judge trial, they shall file an application for the objection in writing before the hearing, and the sole judge will deal with it after review separately according to the following circumstances:

(i) If the objection is tenable, it shall be ruled that a collegial panel shall be formed for trial before expiration of the trial period, and the members of the collegiate panel and related matters shall be notified to both parties in writing. The original sole judge shall continue to participate in the trial.

(ii) If the objection is untenable, it shall be notified to both parties orally, and the contents above shall be recorded.

Article 14 [Ruling on changing trial organizations] A written ruling shall be made on changing trial organizations. The ruling shall contain the ruling result and reasons, be signed by the changed trial organization, and affixed with the seal of the people’s court.

No appeal may be filed against the ruling on the change of trial organizations.

Article 15 [Cohesion effectiveness of the procedures of the changed trial organization]In cases where the trial organization has been changed, the trial period shall be calculated from the date when the people's court files the case, and the litigation actions that have been made shall still be effective.

The facts confirmed by both parties can no longer be subject to testification or cross-examination, but a hearing may be reorganized if the collegial panel deems it really necessary.

Chapter V Supporting Mechanism to Expand the Applicable Scope of the Sole-judge Trial System

Article 16 [Notification obligation applicable to the trial organization]For cases it decides to accept, the people's court shall inform the parties of the applicable form and the right of raising an objection to the trial organization in written, verbal or other appropriate ways.

Article 17 [Establishment of the Sole-judge Trial Team]All courts shall strengthen the construction of the sole-judge trial team as per relevant provisions concerning the sole-judge trial team specified in the Guiding Opinions of Beijing High People’s Court on Strengthening the Construction of the Trial Team (trial) and in light of specific circumstances of expanding the applicable scope of the sole-judge trial system.

Article 18 [Supervision and management mechanism applicable to the sole-judge trial system] For cases to be heard by a judge alone, all courts shall strengthen the supervision and management of trials and promote the performance of duties by law in accordance with the Provisions of Beijing High People’s Court on Regulating the Supervision and Management Responsibilities of the Court President and Chief Judge (trial) and other provisions.

Article 19 [Improve the evaluation system] The evaluation weights and standards for the judge to hear the case of second instance alone shall be scientifically and reasonably improved according to the evaluation requirements of the target responsibility system.

Article 20 [Promote consistency between applicable laws]In the pilot reform of expanding the applicable scope of the sole-judge trial system, it’s required to strictly implement the Implementation Measures of Beijing High People’s Court on Promote Consistency between Applicable Laws (Trial) and other provisions, so as to ensure the combination of the expansion of the sole-judge trial system with the unification of judgment standards.

Article 21 [Establish a fast trial and ruling mechanism] All courts should establish and improve a fast trial and ruling mechanism in which the sole-judge trial system can apply, and explore to simplify the procedures for the judge to hear the cases of second instance alone according to the Provisions of the Beijing Court on Fast Trial and Ruling Cases in Civil Proceedings.

Article 22 [Improve the professional judges meeting system] All courts shall further refine and improve the working mechanism for the sole judge to resort to the meeting of professional judges for discussion according to the Opinions of Beijing High People’s Court on Establishing the Professional Judges Meeting System, so as to provide guidance and reference for the sole judge to accurately refer to laws during case trial.

Chapter VI Supplementary Provisions

Article 23 [Interpretation] This Rules shall be interpreted by Beijing High People’s Court.

Article 24 [Implementation effect] This Rules shall be implemented on a trial basis on the date of promulgation.

Beijing High People’s Court Regulation on Promoting the Intensive Delivery Work (Trial)

In order to optimize resource allocation, promote intensive delivery, safeguard the litigation rights of relevant parties, and improve the trial efficiency and quality, the Regulation is hereby formulated based on the actual trial work of Beijing courts in accordance with the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China and relevant judicial interpretations, Several Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Further Strengthening the Work of Civil Action Service, the Measures for the Implementation of the Pilot Reform of Separating Cases into Simple Cases and Complicated Ones under Civil Procedure issued by the Supreme People’s Court and other regulations.

Chapter I General Regulations

Article I [Delivery subject, personnel and division of responsibilities] The people's court shall carry out delivery in accordance with legal procedures and methods. The specific delivery can be made by the trial team members or litigation service personnel.

Each court can reasonably determine the scope of intensive delivery conducted by the litigation service personnel based on the actual situation.

Article II [Selection of delivery way] Delivery of litigation documents by the people’s court shall be based on the delivery address confirmation. The electronic delivery way shall be given priority, with direct delivery and mail delivery as the main way, supplemented by delivery at the residence of the addressee and entrusted delivery, and announcement delivery as the last way.

Article III [Intensive delivery platform] Information technology shall be fully used to build the “integrated platform of Beijing court for intensive delivery” (hereinafter referred to as “intensive delivery platform”).

The delivery personnel shall use the “intensive delivery platform” to carry out delivery by making appointments at windows, electronic delivery, court express delivery, outbound direct delivery, announcement delivery, entrusted delivery, delivery by passing on and delivery with notarial institutions’ participation.

Article IV [Functions of litigation service department] The litigation service department of each court shall complete the delivery by setting up delivery windows and intensive delivery groups, introducing third-party dispatched agencies, buying social services, and others.

The “Intensive delivery platform” shall be used to collect, integrate and summarize the delivery address information of relevant parties, establish the information database for the delivery address of Beijing’s courts and realize information sharing throughout the city.

Be responsible for guiding and standardizing the delivery work of relevant institutions, improve the construction of information-based platform and strengthen the communication and coordination between grass-roots organizations and relevant departments.

Chapter II Confirmation of Delivery Address

Article V [Confirmation of delivery address] The confirmation of delivery address is an important condition for ensuring the effective delivery by the people’s court. The confirmation of delivery address shall include the delivery address provided by relevant parties, notification of the people’s court, confirmation of the delivery address by relevant parties, scope of application and way of change for the delivery address confirmation and others.

The people’s court shall formulate the uniform Delivery Address Confirmation, and the relevant parties shall be informed of the requirements, matters needing attention, legal consequences, and other contents before the parties fill in the Confirmation. Legal consequences of the case that the addressee rejects to provide the delivery address, provides fake or inaccurate delivery address or fails to notify the people’s court of the change in delivery address in a timely manner, and rejects to receive shall be notified in a comprehensive, detailed and clear manner.

If the relevant parties entrust the agent ad litem, the delivery address confirmed by the agent ad litem shall be deemed as the delivery address of the parties.

Article VI [Scope of application] The delivery address confirmed by relevant parties in the confirmation of delivery address is applicable to the procedure of first instance, the procedure of second instance and the procedure of execution. In the event that relevant parties change the delivery address, they shall inform the people’s court in a timely manner. In the event that the party fails to inform in time, the address confirmed by the party is the delivery address.

Article VII [Confirmation node] When the plaintiff sues, when the defendant defends oneself or the first delivery is made, and when the third parties or other litigation participants participate in the litigation or make the first delivery, the people’s court shall require them to confirm the delivery address and guide the addressees to select the electronic delivery way.

Article VIII [Reject to provide the delivery address] The relevant parties can be affirmed as “rejecting to provide the delivery address” if they are in one of the following circumstances:

(I) Reject to confirm the delivery address or express the willingness not to provide the delivery address to the people’s court face to face;

(II) The delivery address is unknown, but the relevant parties can be contacted by telephone, and reject to receive the litigation documents in the court after the people’s court has made telephone notification, or provide the exact address.

(III) Submit written materials such as jurisdictional objections or requests for avoidance to the court, but the delivery address is not clearly provided in the material;

(IV) Reject to answer the telephone in the case, avoid meeting the delivery personnel, move out of one’s place of residence, and other deliberate avoidances and evading of the delivery, and do not provide or confirm the delivery address.

In the event that the relevant parties reject to provide the delivery address, the people’s court shall make a record for the delivery work and attach relevant written evidentiary materials for future reference.

In the event that the relevant parties cannot be contacted or that it is unable to prove that the parties intentionally avoid or evade the delivery, it cannot be considered as rejecting to provide the delivery address.

Article IX [Deemed as address] In the event that the relevant parties are under the circumstances of rejecting to provide the address in Article VIII, and that the people’s court is unable or not required to request them to confirm the delivery address, the following circumstances shall apply:

(I) In the event that the relevant parties shall have clear agreement on delivery address in the contract and correspondence relevant to the litigation, the address agreed shall be the delivery address;

(II) In the event that there is no such agreement, address of the relevant parties recorded in the written materials submitted for the litigation shall be the delivery address;

(II) In the event that there is no such agreement, no submission by the relevant parties of written materials or there is no clear address in the written materials, the address provided by other litigation or arbitration cases within one year;

(IV) In the event that there is no any one of the abovementioned circumstances, the address often used by the relevant parties for civil activities within one year shall be the delivery address.

The people’s court may notify the addressee by telephone, text message or other ways while making the delivery based on the above mentioned addresses.

Article X [Deemed as address finally] In the event that the relevant parties reject to provide the delivery address in accordance with Article VIII but still cannot confirm the delivery address in accordance with Article IX, the delivery address shall be the address of registered residence or the address registered in the habitual residence of the natural person, and the residence with industrial and commercial registration or other residences with legal registration and record for legal persons or other organizations.

Article XI [Legal consequences] In the event that the addressee rejects to provide the delivery address, provides fake or inaccurate delivery address or fails to notify the people’s court of the change in delivery address in a timely manner, and rejects to receive, which leads to the failure of receiving litigation document by the addressee and failure of direct delivery, the date of litigation document being left in the address shall be the date of delivery; and the date of litigation document being returned shall be the date of delivery for mail delivery.

Chapter III Intensive Delivery

Section I Delivery by making appointments at windows

Article XII [Setting up of windows] All courts shall set up the specific window for delivery in the litigation service hall, and carry out the delivery of litigation documents by making appointment.

Article XIII [Type of delivery] Deliveries by making appointments at windows include the delivery by the trial team members at the appointment time, and the delivery by the litigation service personnel by making an appointment.

Article XIV [Delivery on one’s own] The trial team members may notify the addressee of the time limit for receiving the litigation document at the delivery window by telephone and other ways.

Article XV [Delivery on others’ behalf] As for the delivery by litigation service personnel on behalf of trial team members, the trial team members shall initiate the delivery task through the “Intensive Delivery Platform”, hand over the delivery list and litigation document, notify the time of deliveries by making appointments and add notes of the delivery requirements and matters needing attention when necessary.

Article XVI [Special circumstances] When the litigation service personnel make delivery on behalf of the trial team members, if the relevant parties or agents ad litem fail to receive at the window, don’t take with the identity document or go through complete entrusting procedures, the delivery shall be recorded and returned to the trial team members.

In the event that the relevant parties raise a question on the spot, ask the judge to answer the question in person, ask to contact the judge, refuse to receive and others, the trial team members shall be notified in time, and it is not appropriate to make the delivery by making appointments at windows.

Article XVII [Exceptions] The trial team members shall make the delivery on their own for the mass cases involving social security and stability, significant social influence, new types or a large number of parties concerned, and other cases that are significant, sensitive, hard and complicated, which makes it in appropriate for delivery by litigation service personnel on other’s behalf.

Article XVIII [Delivery result] After the delivery is completed, the litigation service personnel shall give feedback on the delivery result to the trial team members within three days and hand over relevant materials.

Except that the trial team members have special requirements on the time of feedback on the delivery result.

Section II Electronic delivery

Article XIX [Applicable conditions] If the addressee agrees on electronic delivery, he or she may voluntarily choose the instant messaging account such as WeChat, and the ways of electronic delivery such as e-mail, China Judicial Process Information Online, Beijing Court Trial Information Online and fax when filling out the Confirmation Letter of Delivery Address, and confirm the electronic delivery address for receiving litigation documents.

In any of the following situations, the people's court may confirm that the addressee has agreed on electronic delivery:

(i) The addressee expressly agrees;

(ii) The addressee has made an agreement on the application of electronic service in the litigation;

(iii) The addressee takes the initiative to provide the electronic address used to receive the delivery in the complaint and answer submitted;

(iv) The addressee accepts the completed electronic delivery by replying to the receipt, participating in the litigation, etc., and doesn’t expressly disagree with the electronic delivery.

Article 20 [Applicable scope]With express consent of the addressee, the people's court may deliver the judgment documents such as judgments, rulings, and mediations through electronic delivery. The people's court shall provide paper judgment documents as requested by the parties.

Article 21 [Major areas of promotion] The electronic delivery shall preemptively apply upon the consent from certified lawyers in Beijing, according to the Cooperation Agreement between Beijing High People’s Court and Beijing Lawyers Association.

The electronic delivery shall preemptively apply upon the consent from state administrative organs, banking institutions, insurance institutions, other enterprises and other institutions.

Article 22 [Effect standard] Where the people's court makes delivery according to the electronic address voluntarily provided or confirmed by the addressee, the date of arrival at the addressee's specified system is the date of delivery.

The date of arrival at the specific date of the addressee stipulated in the preceding paragraph is the date of successful sending displayed in the corresponding system of the people’s court. Nevertheless, if the addressee proves the date of arrival at the specific date of the addressee is different from the date of successful sending displayed in the corresponding system of the people’s court, the date of arrival at the specific system proved by the addressee shall prevail.

If the addressee agrees on electronic service but fails to provide or confirm the electronic address, the people's court shall make delivery according to the electronic address of the addressee. Whether the delivery is completed shall be determined according to the following circumstances:

(1) Where the addressee receives the materials delivered, or makes a corresponding litigation according to the content of delivery, it shall be deemed as effective delivery;

(2) The system where the addressee’s electronic address is located reports back that the addressee has read it, or there is other evidence to prove that the addressee has received it, it is presumed that the effective delivery is completed, except the circumstances of not receiving the materials delivered in which the addressee can prove there is a system error, the delivery address is not used by oneself or the delivered contents are not read by oneself.

Article 23 [Voucher preservation] When adopting the electronic delivery as an effective delivery method, the people’s court shall prepare an electronic delivery voucher containing the address information, name of the addressee, receiving address information, sending time, name of litigation documents and other contents, and keep them on file for check. The electronic delivery voucher has the effect of delivery receipt.

Section 3 Court Express Delivery

Article 24 [Delivery institution] When delivering a litigation document by posting, the delivery personnel shall submit it to the postal institution for delivery through court express delivery.

Article 25 [Service at stationary point] The postal institution will deliver the service at stationary point to Beijing courts, and take charge of collection, printing, distribution, inquiry, certificate issuance and other affairs related to court express delivery.

Article 26 [Delivery initiation] The members of the trial team shall initiate a delivery task through the “Intensive Delivery Platform”, and print the postal order and litigation document on their own or by consigning the litigation service personnel.

Article 27 [Delivery feedback] After completing the delivery work, the litigation service personnel shall enter the mail delivery information on the date of receipt in a timely manner, and make feedback to the trial team in three days. The members of the judicial team can check the court express delivery in the system.

Section 4 Outbound Direct Delivery

Article 28 [Applicable condition] The court shall adopt the outbound direct delivery to deliver the litigation document, provided that the delivery address is not confirmed, or the court can’t notify the addressee on the phone or through other contact information to take the litigation document, or the addressee fails to take the litigation document within the period notified by the people’s court.

Article 29 [Outward concentrated delivery] All courts may set up a centralized delivery group in the litigation service department to undertake the delivery of cases of different divisions, detached tribunals and different professional trial areas or cases centralized in some administrative divisions based on the situation.

Article 30 [Exceptions] The personnel of the trial team shall deliver litigation documents on their own, if a collective case involves social security and stability, significant influence in the society, new type or large number of parties concerned, or the case is significant, sensitive, suspicious and complex, which makes it in appropriate for the centralized delivery group to perform an outward direct delivery.

Article 31 [Delivery initiation] When deciding to adopt the outward direct delivery by the centralized delivery group, the members of the trial team shall initiate a delivery task through the “Intensive Delivery Platform”, hand over the delivery list and litigation deeds, and include delivery requirements and notes, when necessary.

Article 32 [Delivery period] After receiving a delivery task, the centralized delivery group shall complete registration within one working day, and complete the delivery work within five working days. The group can moderately extend the delivery period when necessary for any special reason, but shall feedback relevant information to the personnel of the trial team.

Article 33 [Delivery requirements] In case of the outward direct delivery, one or two delivery personnel shall execute the task, take the initiative to produce the working permits to the addressee, and record the entire delivery process by picture or video or in other manners, when possible.

Article 34 [Delivery at the residence of the addressee] Where the addressee refuses to sign the receipt, the delivery personnel can leave the litigation document, except for a reconciliation agreement, at the residence of the addressee, and record the entire delivery process by picture or video or in other manners, or alternatively, the delivery personnel can invite a witness to arrive at the premise, specify the situation, indicate the reason for refusal and date on the delivery receipt, which shall be signed or stamped by the delivery personnel and the witness, and leave the litigation document at the residence of the addressee.

The witness includes the staff of the residents’ committee or the villagers’ committee or staff of the organization where the addressee works. Nevertheless, when the delivery personnel of the people’s court encounter a difficulty in inviting the aforesaid staff or representative to serve as the witness, the witness can also include the staff of the police office, the industry and commerce administration authority, the people’s reconciliation committee, the judicial office at the town (or sub-district) level, the comprehensive governance organization at the community level or other organizations.

Article 35 [Delivery result] After completing the delivery affair, the centralized delivery group shall submit the delivery receipt or the document proving the delivery at the residence of the addressee to the personnel of the trial team within three days, and the judge will confirm the delivery result.

Except that the trial team members have special requirements on the time of feedback on the delivery result.

Section 5 Announcement Delivery

Article 36 [Applicable scope] For simple cases where the facts are clear and the relationship between rights and obligations is defined, the announcement delivery may apply.

Article 37 [Condition precedent for application] Where the addressee is unknown in whereabouts or unavailable for delivery in other manners, the delivery personnel shall adopt the announcement delivery and specify the reason and process.

Article 38 [Service at stationary point] The people’s court newspaper office will deliver the service at stationary point to Beijing courts and take charge of charge reconciliation, receiving, distribution, collection, printing, distribution, contact, coordination and other affairs related to delivery.

Article 39 [Delivery initiation] The members of the trial team shall initiate an announcement delivery task through the “Intensive Delivery Platform”, enter the information and write the document on their own.

Article 40 [Delivery result] A document shall be considered as delivered after the announcement is published and the legal announcement period expires. The personnel of the trial team can inquire about the announcement release status in the system, print the electronic announcement receipt on demand to serve as the delivery voucher and keep it on file for reference.

Section 6 Entrusted Delivery and Other Delivery Methods

Article 41 [Entrusted delivery] Where it is difficult to directly deliver a litigation document, the people’s court can entrust another court to deliver the document on its behalf.

Different courts can, based on the actual condition, establish an entrusted delivery collaboration mechanism between them in order to save the cost of delivery and improve the efficiency of delivery.

The litigation service department of a court may select to make the delivery of litigation documents entrusted by other courts for delivery.

Article 42 [Delivery by transfer] If an addressee is a serviceman, the document shall be transferred through the political department of his troop at the detachment level or above.

If the addressee is put under custody, the deed shall be transferred by his custody agency. If the addressee is put under mandatory educational measure, the deed shall be transferred by his mandatory educational agency.

Article 43 [Delivery with notaries institutions’ participation] A court can entrust a notary institution to help execute delivery affairs, determine the scope of litigation documents to be delivered, and put the delivery process, delivery result and other delivery flow registers on file for reference.

Chapter IV Supplementary Provisions

Article 44 [Implement by reference] The Regulation can apply by analogy to the delivery of litigation documents involving criminal, administrative and enforcement cases.

The delivery under a foreign-related case shall be subject to relevant provisions.

Article 45[Interpretation] This Regulation shall be interpreted by Beijing High People's Court. All courts may, in accordance with the Regulation, formulate relevant implementation rules and submit them to the Litigation Service Office of the Beijing High People’s Court for filing.

Article 46 [Implementation effect] This Regulation shall be implemented on a trial basis on the date of promulgation.