Views in person to make this difficult to ensure a fair trial. Third, the trial supervision procedure and the end of the program in a timely manner According to article 179 of the Civil Procedure Law of China stipulates that if the parties have new evidence to overturn the original verdict ruling, or the fact that the original decision or
Ruling to the major lack of evidence, the court shall retry the case. I think that the principle of this provision too. First need to discuss the civil action, the trial supervision procedure and the fact that the relationship between the demand is, no doubt, pragmatic trials should be the basic principles of justice, but in civil cases, the facts
Does not mean that either party made at any time as long as any new evidence that the original judgments and decisions in force insufficient evidence identified by the original sentence would be correct. As mentioned earlier, the fact that in civil cases identified by the evidence, incomplete evidence and inconsistencies between the various evidence is routine, it is impossible

The trial supervision system of open trial, the trial of the case against retrial is basically a way of written hearing, at best, and asked the parties to conduct some research 3, this approach had many problems. Because in the retrial process, the reason why the referee has found the error in force is mainly because of new evidence, so
In accordance with the principle of seeking truth from facts, the facts should be reidentified, but the problem is that the evidence presented, some from a party, some by the court surveys, no matter through Nike dunk SB what channels, new evidence must be through the trial in court for crossexamination by the parties, certification, otherwise, the new evidence is very difficult, and
Because no court session, one or both parties are difficult to see these new evidence, and thus can not confirm the objectivity of evidence, legitimacy and relevance, only with the courts to make judgments based on their knowledge, hardly a science, in particular, should be noted that the parties can not be directly judicial officers in court to present their