Abstract:The limits of justice mean the scope and boundaries of judicial power. This problem relates to the fundamentals of judicial power, such as the suability of disputes and rights, the justice activism and its limits, how to protect rights in the field of social self—organization, and how the justice impact the public policy, etc. Courts in China expanded its powers actively in the initial stage of judicial reform, but today, from one extreme to another, courts often use self—restriction strategies when they face the complexity of social contradictions. This paper tries to draw a relatively specific and clear boundary for judicial power from both theory and practice aspects. The supply of justice is determined by social needs, but the capacity of judicial power is limited, and its function depends on certain conditions. For example, justice can not handle the disputes which lack of one party. Both the number of the litigants and the complexity of the case affect the capacity of judicial power. While justice specializes in deciding the right disputes in the field of purely private interests, the limited nature of judicial function would be revealed when the dispute concerns group disputes, public interest, social self—reduction and the field of science and technology. Judicial power shall abide by its own borders. The limits of justice also remind judges that they must think just like judges rather than legislators, and use the logic of law instead of the logical of moral to demonstrate decision reasons. In the view of protecting litigious right, courts shall not refuse to judge for any reason. So the limits of justice in disputes settlement often lead to the tension between the safeguard of litigious right and the boundary of judicial power. Therefore, the system designs need to find a balance between them. The key is to set up mechanisms for identification and diversion according to the principle of judicial power operation, so that litigable disputes can access to the courts smoothly and those not suit to justice can be diverted to other agencies. To keep restraint on the matter beyond its capacity is the necessary guarantee for judicial authority.

The Limitation of Folk Law

, Types, and Legal Features of Folk Finance

On "Refusal to Apply Rules" in Administrative Litigation:Based on the Analysis of No.5 Guiding Case Published by the Supreme People's Court

The Informal Constraint of Local Governments:A case study of conflict between law and folk conventions

The Logic of the Limitation of Public Interest on Basic Rights

On Limit of National Laws in the Process of Jural Development in Rural Areas

Functionalist Interpretation of Legal History and Its Limits——A review on Law and Society in Traditional China by Ch'u T'ung-tsu

Contemporary or Lasting?——A Administrative Law Perspective for CAR Ban

On the Function of Folk Law in Settling Marriage and Family Disputes

Restrict or Mould:on the Duality of the Function of the Law Concerning Basic Rights

Law As a Culturally Constituted Sign-System – A Space for Interpretation

On The Scope Of Limitation's Application

Delimitation Between Sources of Law and Forms of Law

The Relationship between Rural Customary Law and National Statutory Law

Discriminating Between the Function of Law and the Effect of Law

Legal interpretation: Meaning as social construction

Public Law or Private Law: on the Protection of Intellectual Property of Folklore

The Levels of Law and the Transition of Current Scientific Theory

Limits of Justice: Between Judicial Activism and Judicial Restraint

Public Policy and Criminal Law in a Risk Society

The (possible) Costs and Limits of Sociological Jurisprudence——A Review of Pound's Jurisprudence(Vol.I) under the Perspective of Social Integration