Problems and Optimization Ways of Similar Cases Be Treated Similarly -- Based on the Analysis of 28 Administrative Guiding Cases

Abstract

The guiding cases system, which has been implemented in China for more than a decade, plays an important role in unifying the application of laws, ensuring uniform judgment standards for similar cases, and making similar judgments in similar cases. Article 7 of the Regulations on the Guidance of Cases provides that “Guiding cases issued by the Supreme People’s Court shall be referred to by the people’s courts at all levels when handling similar cases.” It can be seen that in judicial practice, guiding cases “should be referred to” when a judge must retrieve similar cases to one being handled to identify and compare the similarities between the pending and the retrieved cases.

At the level of theoretical value, upon analysis using the framework of justice theory that deals with similar situations similarly in Rawls’s A Theory of Justice, guiding cases provide similar standards that offer a stable reference for legal practitioners and the public, thus creating a basis for reasonable expectations. Based on existing legal rules, people can predict the legal consequences of their acts and regulate themselves accordingly.

When hearing similar cases, judges can refer to the guiding cases to compare similarities. Similar cases should be handled similarly, with the same treatment given to the same situations. In judicial practice, parties may intuitively compare the basic facts, the focus of disputes, and the application of law in their own cases to those of similar cases on PKULAW, FAXIN, and other platforms. If they find that the resulting judgment in their case is inconsistent with those of guiding cases or other cases found on China Judgments Online, they will doubt judicial justice. In order to give people a sense of fairness and justice, every judicial case must be treated equally. In cases of absence, ambiguity, or conflicts of legal provisions, the Supreme People’s Court should issue guiding cases to make the application of laws uniform and reduce the occurrence of similar cases having different judgments. In handling a case of significant social impact or with complexity, judges should retrieve guiding cases and similar cases prudently and study the existing judgment rules therein, thus making a judgment that is generally consistent with that of a guiding case.

As a guiding case is characterized by stability once it is released, judges are obliged to retrieve it when similar cases arise to ensure similar judgment outcomes. If a pending case shares similarities in terms of the focus of disputes and key facts, the result or ideas of judgment should be naturally similar. The identification of judgment rules therein after retrieval of similar cases will alleviate the burden of argumentation of judges, which not only saves judicial resources and improves the efficiency of judicial trials, but also safeguards people’s reasonable expectations from similar cases.

In this paper, comparative study, empirical study, and case analyses are used to analyze the relationship between guiding cases and similar judgment for similar cases, thus identifying potential problems with the implementation of the guiding case system in China, such as inadequate supply of guiding cases, low citation of cases, unknown effectiveness and actual effect of cases, and the like. In A Theory of Justice, Rawls provides a systematic, comprehensive, and in-depth study of justice. Much of his argument on justice is heuristic for the development of the Chinese guiding case system. In talking about the basic meaning of justice, Rawls remarked, “People may believe a specific social structure is unjust, but it can be just in a sense.” Namely, the system has been executed impartially and consistently by judges and other officials. Justice occurs when similar situations are handled similarly, and all relevant similarities and differences are identified with existing specifications. Rawls believed that no matter what the substantive principle is, the impartial and consistent enforcement of law can be referred to as “formal justice.” He pointed out that “equality is basically rule-based justice. This means fairly applied and consistent interpretation of rules based on the principle of handling similar situations similarly (as defined by legal provisions and precedents).” For example, he holds that the rule of law is associated with formal justice—the regular and impartial administration of public rules.[ John Bordley Rawls, A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press,1971, p. 206.] He further proposed that “the rule of law also implies the precept that similar cases be treated similarly.” This kind of rule of law promotes a sense of formal justice. Although the content of all guiding cases cannot be guaranteed to be equally just, formal justice can be achieved, at least through similar trials of similar cases.

In this study, the main research questions addressed are how guiding cases promote similar judgments for similar cases and how to improve and optimize the existing guiding case system. With the principle of “similar treatment for similar cases” and the argument on formal justice in Rawls’s A Theory of Justice as the theoretical framework, in view of the problems with implementation of guiding cases, it is proposed that the concept of guiding cases be expanded from the Supreme People’s Court to high and intermediate people’s courts. After linkage with the trial class system, their strength may be utilized to solve problems such as inadequate supply, poor application, and the unknown effectiveness of guiding cases. Therefore, continuous exploration should be made toward optimizing the guiding case system, both theoretically and in practice, increasing the number of guiding cases, and clarifying the effectiveness of guiding cases, so that guiding cases may be frequently used and cited by judges at all levels nationwide, and the significance of similar judicial cases can be demonstrated through uniform judgments in similar cases.

At present, a series of systems, including the guiding case system, the similar case retrieval system, the standard application of a unified law system, among others, was established based on a large number of judicial documents under the guidance of fairness, justice, and important programmatic documents of rule of law that comprise proactive and effective judicial concepts, which greatly reduces the leeway for judges’ discretion in hearing similar cases. The cumulative effect of these systems constantly shapes and maintains the application of the same judgment for similar cases.

Date of Award	8 Nov 2022
Original language	English
Awarding Institution	City University of Hong Kong
Supervisor	Lihong LIN (External Supervisor) & Feng LIN (Supervisor)