Court's Default Trial Procedure Illegal, Zhiming Lawyer Wisely and Bravely Corrects to Re-trial
In early May 2018, a lawyer from Zhiming Law Firm accepted a commission from Company H to represent a major, complex, and difficult economic dispute case involving millions of yuan, and submitted the authorization to the court on the same day. On an afternoon in late May, when the Zhiming lawyer inquired with the court about the progress of the case, the court informed him that the case had already been heard in absentia on a certain day in mid-May.
That evening, Zhiming lawyers immediately verified with Company H whether it had received the summons. After receiving a negative response, they promptly contacted the court the next day to request a retrial. However, the court refused, citing the courier receipt for the summons mailed to Company H as evidence, and merely suggested that Company H submit its own representation (argument) materials. Both parties held to their respective positions.
In a disadvantaged position where our side was weak, Zhiming lawyer neither blindly followed the court's demands nor waited passively for defeat. He sternly pointed out to the relevant personnel that, according to the Civil Procedure Law and its judicial interpretations, the court's default hearing constituted a serious procedural violation and must be corrected through a retrial. The judge in question, however, made excuses and was only willing to review our written submissions. Zhiming lawyer resolutely filed a complaint with the relevant higher authorities. With the intervention of senior leadership, the court ultimately agreed to hold a proper retrial. Through a battle of wisdom and courage, Zhiming lawyer once again safeguarded the client's legal rights.
