A Probe Into The Supplementary Relationship Between Guiding Cases And Judicial Interpretations

Since the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress passed the“Resolution on Strengthening the Work of Legal Interpretation” in 1981,the Supreme People’s Court has issued a considerable number of judicial interpretations.As a statutory country,the Supreme People’s Court has used judicial interpretations in the context of “should be rough but not detailed”.The form of guidance and standardization of national adjudication work,coordination of the contradiction between the changing social conditions and the limitations of statutory law,in order to make up for legal loopholes,unify the understanding and application of the law,in line with my country’s traditions and national conditions.For a long time,judicial interpretation,as the only legal interpretation tool in our country,has made great contributions to unifying and guiding the national trial work.The formal establishment of the case guidance system on November 26,2010 changed this situation.The promulgation of the Supreme People’s Court "Regulations on Case Guidance Work" resulted in the formal formation of a mode of provision of adjudication rules where judicial interpretations and guiding cases coexist.There are similarities between sexual cases and judicial interpretations in terms of system construction and functional positioning,but scholars often admit that guiding cases play a special role that judicial interpretations do not have in terms of unifying the application of the law,strengthening the reasoning of judgments and the use of legal methods.effect.During the ten years of coexistence of guiding cases and judicial interpretations,there has been a lot of discussion about the relationship between the two.This article will be divided into five parts to discuss:The first part mainly leads to the main issues discussed in this article.Starting from the historical evolution of the guiding cases and judicial interpretations as well as their respective functional values,the relationship between the two systems is found,which in turn triggers thinking about the relationship between the two.The second part is based on the separate discussion of the two systems in the first part,comprehensively considers the guiding cases and judicial interpretations,and comprehensively analyzes the similarities in the issue of the main body,the system objectives,the clearing-out mechanism,and the legality of their own systems.Place.At the same time,it highlights the differences between the two systems in terms of generation procedures,application methods,legal effects,rule carriers,and system costs,although both systems are legally applicable.The three mainstream views of the relationship between the two and the judicial interpretation are the "supplementary theory",the "replacement theory" and the "parallel theory".The third part puts forward this article’s insights on the relationship between guiding cases and judicial interpretations,that is,guiding cases as a supplement to judicial interpretations can make up for loopholes in judicial interpretations.At the same time,judicial interpretation can incorporate mature guiding case rules into the normative law to complete the complementarity of guiding cases and judicial interpretations.This kind of complementarity basically follows the four basic principles,to make up for abstraction in detail,to make up for lag in time,to change obedience with initiative,and to make up for the individual in general.The fourth and fifth parts analyze in detail the reasons why the Guiding Cases "complement but not supplement" the obstacles to judicial interpretation,and propose corresponding improvement measures.Mainly include: improving the ability to supply judgment rules for guiding cases,rationally positioning the functional boundaries between guiding cases and judicial interpretation,endowing the legality of creating judgment rules for guiding cases,and smoothing the channels for judicial interpretation to absorb guiding case rules.