Abstract:From the perspective of functionalism, the case—guiding system in China may be classified into the system of precedent in a broad sense. The formation and selection of our guiding cases mainly depend on the extra—judicial power of the Supreme People's Court, which are not rested on the judicial hierarchy and do not follow the approach of the general formalism. In order to promote the case—guiding system, the trial instance jurisdiction should be reformed accordingly, and the judicial function of the Supreme People's Court should be strengthened, while the legislative function reduced. The Supreme People's Court and the Superior People's Court should have the power to select and set guiding cases from those decided by themselves. The standard of selecting guiding cases should be specific and flexible rather than general. A judge or the panel of judges who preside o-ver the case should be granted the preliminary power to select guiding cases, so the case—load will be decreased, the efficiency will be promoted, and judges will be able to spend more time and efforts to write the opinions of guiding cases. It is impossible for a precedent to be followed virtually without being followed formally. Our case—guiding system should allow judges to cite guiding cases directly in their opinions, because without the formal requirement of direct citation, those guiding cases published by the Supreme People's Court will never be accepted as guiding ones in the sense of precedents. The system of precedent is closely connected with and mutually decided by the whole judicial system, even the whole legal system. The case—guiding system in China, however, intentionally distances itself from a series of judicial system, such as the court system, the trial instance jurisdiction, the professionalization and independence of judges, so the actual effect of guiding cases could be doubted. The perfection of the case —guiding system in China should be joined with the judicial reform, and both the system and the reform will be promoted mutually and reciprocally.

On ＂One System＂ of Chinese Courts：the History,Practice and Theory

On Jurisprudence Leading to Judicial Path——the Realism Path of China's Jurisprudence

"Typical Cases" As an Informal Legal Source in the Administrative Law

Transforming the Evaluation of the Rule of Law in China

The People's Court in Transition: the Prospects of the Chinese Judicial Reform

THE ORIGIN AND TRANSFORMATION OF JUDICIAL YUAN: FROM THE COMPARATIVE AND HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

Local Society,Ethical Traditions,Practice on the Rule of Law and Active Justice

Chinese judicial justice on the cloud: a future call or a Pandora’s box? An analysis of the ‘intelligent court system’ of China

In Search of a Long-Term Development Path for China: Starting from Differences between Assigning Responsibility and Contracting

Performance Evaluation in Courts of China: the Logic of Isomorphism and Dual-track and Relevant Problems

The Limits of Judicial Reforms: How and Why China Failed to Centralize its Court System

The Implementation and Reformation of Administrative Litigation Law in China

Lingering Between Centralization and Decentralization:Examination of Judicial Philosophy in Social Transformation Period

The Formation of Precedent and the Case-guiding System in China

The Idea of “One Country,Two Systems” Enriches Marxist Jurisprudence

Conditional Justice: Evaluating the Judicial Centralization Reform in China

The Legal Structure and Practical Dilemma of the Establishment of the "Review System"

Criminal Judicial Bad Effect and Improvement Brought by Traditional Law Culture

Study on Criminal Jurisprudence: Western Countries' Experience and China's Reality

Multidimensional Thoughts of Civil Concentrated Trial from the Vision of System Theory——Reflection and Prospect of the Reform of Court Trial in China

There's Nothing to Say Vs. There's Something to Say ——on Traditional Justice and Jurisprudence in China by ZHANG Weiren