You became a lawyer and sent the judge in

Chapter 335: Administrative review guided by the Supreme Court—Rejection of protest!

On the judgment seat.

Peng Guangliang serves as the presiding judge of this trial.

Facing objections raised by other defendants in the trial.

Didn't react too much.

why?

Because he just stated that he would not review the review unit.

Then it must be done in accordance with the legal interpretation.

When the collegial panel was conducting its deliberations, they had already conducted relevant discussions.

The result of the discussion was that if only the plaintiff’s claim was dismissed.

It needs to be taken into account that live broadcast hearings are currently taking place.

This case involves a public topic, so the plaintiff’s claims cannot be directly and completely dismissed.

Because that will have a negative impact on public opinion.

Furthermore.

The factual evidence submitted by the plaintiff is conclusive.

The Health, Industry and Commerce and Food Inspectorate did indeed have the circumstances stated in the appeal.

Let’s not talk about anything else.

What legal provisions were followed in rejecting Su Bai's appeal?

How to reject the application if it is not in accordance with the law?

Having said that, they would rather judge all the defendants in accordance with the provisions of the law.

I don't want to be mentioned because of this matter. Supervision and review.

Although the administration has said hello, it has to do with its own prospects.

Which one is lighter and which one is heavier, they still know very clearly in their hearts.

The appeal was dismissed.

At that time, it will still be their judges who will be in trouble.

Based on this situation, the collegial panel discussed:

In this trial, the review department's trial will not be reviewed.

This has relevant legal provisions and legal interpretations.

According to the Supreme Court, the review authority procedurally rejected the review application.

The applicant discusses the reconsideration decision and the original administrative action.

You can only choose one and litigate it, and it does not involve specific instances of the issue of co-defendants.

This is in accordance with Article 48, Paragraph 1, Item 2 of the Implementation Regulations of the Administrative Reconsideration Law.

The application for administrative review was rejected.

According to the provisions of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the "Interpretations of the Supreme Court on Certain Issues Concerning the Application of Administrative Litigation Law".

The reconsideration authority specified in Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Administrative Litigation Law decides to uphold the original administrative action or reject the reconsideration application.

The prosecutor can sue the original administrative act.

You can also sue the review unit for inaction and require the review unit to accept its review application.

No matter which path the prosecutor chooses, it does not involve the issue of another agency being a co-defendant.

You cannot do both at the same time, you can only choose one.

If the original administrative action and the reconsideration authority are sued at the same time.

Violation of the principle of non-negotiation results in duplication of work for the court and the review unit.

To put it simply, this is in accordance with the guidance of the Supreme Court.

How to file a lawsuit if it is believed that the review unit has failed to act and the administrative unit has failed to act.

The reconsideration unit and the administrative unit cannot be prosecuted at the same time.

As co-defendants, the two parties can only choose one party to conduct review, and the other party does not need to conduct review.

In accordance with this legal provision, the collegial panel discussed the matter.

The difficulty in handling this case is that the defendant has a review unit with a higher administrative level.

In this case, then choose a soft persimmon judge.

So in accordance with the Supreme Court's provisions on review and appeal of the Administrative Procedure Law, deciding to choose one is equivalent to saying that this problem has been solved.

To put it bluntly, in simple terms -

The court has the right to decide whether to sue the administrative review unit or the administrative unit.

You can only choose one of the two.

Since the plaintiff's lawsuit application cannot be dismissed or withdrawn, the defendant must be judged by other units.

after all.…

According to statements from other units of the defendant, the administrative level of the reconsideration unit is relatively high.

Therefore, relevant judgments can only be made on the defendant's industrial and commercial administration, food supervision and hygiene.

Of course...all this is in compliance with legal procedures and legal interpretations.
.

....

On the judgment seat.

Faced with the dissatisfaction and objections raised by the defendant, Peng Guangliang directly dismissed them.

"The court will reject the objections raised by the defendants, the industrial and commercial, food supervision and health departments."

"As follows by law."

“According to certain provisions of the Administrative Litigation Law promulgated by the Supreme Court, the administrative review unit and the defendant administrative department cannot be jointly sued.”

"You can only choose one."

“Based on the Supreme Court’s guiding cases and relevant legal provisions, the defendant’s relevant claims are dismissed.”

Sitting at the defendant's seat is whether it is the person in charge of industry and commerce, the person in charge of health, or the person in charge of food inspection.

All expressed dissatisfaction with this behavior.

why?

Because the three departments are not afraid of losing the case in a normal court trial.

This is because there is an administrative review unit among the co-defendants sued in this court trial.

But now the court is making a choice in accordance with certain provisions of the Supreme Court on administrative litigation.

So what happens next?

What follows is certainly self-evident.

According to the defense just now, several departments they are accused of will definitely be judged.

So as the person in charge, I have a certain influence to a certain extent.

At this time, Yu Yan, who was sitting in the defendant's seat, opened his mouth to refute under the hint of the person in charge of industry and commerce.

"Presiding judge, we would like to ask that the court makes its decision in accordance with certain provisions of the Supreme Court on administrative litigation and does not conduct additional review of the review unit."

"Then...why not reject it when the case is filed?"

"Need to have a related dismissal at trial?"

"So we don't understand and don't agree with this."

On the court, Peng Guangliang looked at Yu Yan, did he disagree?

What's the use of disagreeing?

I make a judgment in accordance with the law, do I need your consent?

The reply based on certain provisions of the Supreme Court is already a legal interpretation.

As for why the case was not dismissed when it was filed in the first place.

This question is also very easy to answer.

"As for the question raised by the defendant's industrial and commercial lawyer, the court gave a corresponding explanation."

"first.…"

"The filing of a case is not confirmed by the collegial panel, but by the filing tribunal."

"This is the work of the filing court, not the trial work of the collegial panel."

"The collegial panel only advances and hears the case in accordance with relevant laws and the guidance and interpretation of the Supreme Court."

"So in response to the questions and protests raised by the industrial and commercial lawyers."

"The collegial panel made the relevant rejection."

"If the defendant believes that the collegial panel made any mistakes in understanding and applying the law."

"You can continue to file an appeal or directly submit it to a supervisory review to determine that the court's application was wrong."

"In this trial, regarding the protest, the defendant is not allowed to make any further statements."    "The trial continues!"

The hammer struck.

The heads of industry and commerce, sanitation and food inspection in the defendant's seat all looked a bit unhappy.

However, after asking the entrusted lawyer whether such a decision was against the law.

After learning that it was not against the law, I could only hold back my breath.

Who makes the administrative level of his department not as high as that of the review unit?

If the administrative level on your side is high, the court may choose the review unit as the defendant.

only.…

The reconsideration unit is an administrative jurisdiction department that specializes in handling and administering their units.

So no matter how you think about it, their administrative level cannot be higher than that of the reconsideration unit.

The trial is still continuing.

For the above collegial panel, in accordance with certain provisions of the Supreme Court, it chose not to prosecute the review unit.

Su Bai didn't have any objection.

Because this court hearing itself is to resolve the client's lawsuit application.

The reconsideration unit did not supervise the administrative unit and indeed showed related slack.

There is no doubt about this.

However - this court hearing decided not to conduct relevant review of the reconsideration unit.

There is a legal basis.

Having said that, if the review unit still does not supervise the case.

So what to do?

It is possible to submit the case to the court for review separately.

Just go to court together with other administrative units.

This is also what the Supreme Court pointed out regarding the avoidance of duplication of work in reconsideration trials in the Administrative Litigation Law.
.

...

call.…

Since the court has decided not to review the reconsideration unit during this court hearing.

Then the rest is much simpler...

The next step is probably the court presentation and sentencing.

really.

Just as Su Bai predicted.

After the presiding judge knocked the hammer, all parties were allowed to make court statements.

"Regarding this trial, the facts are clear and the evidence is clear."

“The collegial panel has already understood the content of each party’s defense.”

"The court statement will begin below."

"Now let the plaintiff make a court statement."

Regarding the court statement, Su Bai didn't have much to say, because the facts were already very clear.

This trial involved many parties.

Su Bai also made a statement based on the behavior of Dafa Supermarket and the laziness of its jurisdiction.

"presiding judge."

"Our court states as follows:"

"First of all, we believe that expired food sold in Dafa Supermarket has caused food poisoning in many infants and young children."

"It has already been involved in mass poisoning incidents caused by negligence."

"So for Dafa Supermarket, we believe that our claims and other applications are reasonable requests."

"Secondly, there are accusations against relevant departments such as industry and commerce, food inspection, and health."

"In this trial, the defendant did not present any facts."

"In addition, he even presented suspected forged evidence to escape his own inaction..."

"What kind of situation is this?"

"After learning that several children were involved in eating expired food, the relevant sellers were still not punished."

"This is a serious case of knowledge and inaction."

"I would like to ask the responsible persons on the defendant's bench."

"What is the reason for your inaction? Is it because you are afraid of taking responsibility?"

"..."

"In any case, the fact of inaction has been established."

"Based on the above, we believe that the relevant responsible persons and relevant departments should be judged in accordance with the law."

"The above is our statement, presiding judge."

After Su Bai finished making relevant statements, the presiding judge asked the defendant to make a court statement.

The court statement made by the defendant was relatively simple.

Again, because there is no fact of action, it seems particularly empty in terms of rebuttal and court statement.

In fact, the health department directly omitted the court statement.

After all parties finished their presentations, Peng Guangliang glanced at Wang Xiang and Shen Jun.

Then sound the hammer.

"All aspects of this trial have been completed."

“Now let’s announce the verdict!”

Everyone stood up and listened to Peng Guangliang continue to read the verdict.

"In response to the plaintiff's accusation that Dafa Supermarket sold expired food, it resulted in food poisoning claims and a public apology."

"The collegial panel decided after deliberation, fact verification and result determination that Dafa Supermarket did indeed sell expired food to the plaintiff, causing him food poisoning."

"Dafa Supermarket should compensate the plaintiff, provide medical compensation, and make a public apology to Xiao Pingjun personally."

"In addition...to compensate for lost work time and other losses, the costs of this lawsuit will be borne by Dafa Supermarket."

"and."

"The plaintiff in this trial has just decided not to review the lawsuit filed by the review department in accordance with several explanations of administrative litigation given by the Supreme Court."

"No decisions are being made at this time."

"As for industry and commerce, food supervision, and sanitation, the court determined that there were indeed relevant inactions."

"And the circumstances involved are serious."

"It is determined that industry and commerce, food inspection, sanitation, etc. will respond to this incident within the specified time and resolve it."

"And apologize to the person involved."

“The respective litigation costs against the relevant departments shall be borne by the defendant department.”

"The verdict is over!"

"If all parties to the trial have any objections to this trial, please file an appeal within the specified time, or initiate a supervisory review."

Boom boom boom!

"Closed court!"

As Peng Guangliang banged the hammer, the verdict of this trial was announced.

call.…

This administrative lawsuit has finally been decided.

Next comes the most difficult execution phase.

The difficulty in administration is that even if you win the lawsuit, it is also difficult to enforce it!

However, Su Bai was not too worried about this.

As long as the court makes a judgment, won’t the rest of the matter be easy to handle?

Report it!

He fabricated evidence, failed to act, deliberately covered up the fact of food poisoning, evaded relevant responsibilities, and turned a blind eye to the food poisoning of many infants and young children.

Above, the first two points, one is the fact and the other is the result of the court’s judgment.

What follows is the major impact.

This kind of thing...how should I put it, submit it to the relevant department.

Once submitted, it will be accurate!

Maybe a lot of people can be dismissed from their posts...
.

....

PS: Please give me a monthly ticket~

(End of this chapter)