Question raised

Judicial appraisal refers to the activity in which appraisers use scientific technology or specialized knowledge to identify and judge specialized issues involved in litigation, and provide appraisal opinions. At present, the business scope of institutions listed in the judicial appraisal directory includes forensic pathology appraisal, forensic clinical appraisal, forensic toxicology appraisal, forensic physical evidence appraisal, human disability level appraisal, trace appraisal, document appraisal, electronic data appraisal, air pollution environmental damage appraisal, soil and groundwater environmental damage appraisal, other environmental damage appraisal, asset evaluation, construction project cost evaluation, accounting audit, product quality testing, etc.

How to handle appraisal matters that exceed the business scope of institutions listed in the judicial appraisal directory? Several judicial interpretations of the Supreme People's Court support the selection of professional institutions outside the judicial appraisal directory for appraisal. For example, Article 21 of the "Regulations on the Management of Outsourced Appraisal, Evaluation, Auction and Other Work of the Supreme People's Court" (Fa Ban Fa [2007] No. 5) stipulates that "when selecting, if the requirements for the commission exceed the scope of the directory, specialized personnel should select from professional institutions or experts with relevant professional qualifications according to the commission requirements and solicit opinions from the parties involved

In addition to the judicial interpretations of the Supreme People's Court clearly stating that professional institutions can be selected for appraisal outside the judicial appraisal roster, there are also corresponding provisions in some local judicial interpretations.

For example, Article 8, Paragraph 2 of the "Provisions of the Beijing High People's Court on Entrusting Appraisal and Evaluation Work to Foreign Parties (Trial)" (implemented on December 29, 2018) stipulates that "if the parties fail to reach an agreement through consultation or the people's court entrusts appraisal and evaluation according to its authority, and there are situations where professional institutions cannot be designated in the roster, each court may designate them outside the roster on its own." Article 7 of the "Opinions of the Jiangsu Provincial High People's Court on Determining the Entrusted Appraisal Institution" (implemented on February 17, 2014) stipulates that "appraisal categories that are not within the business scope of appraisal institutions on electronic information platforms shall be randomly determined by the parties after consultation to determine the appraisal institution or selection scope; if consultation fails, they shall be randomly determined within the scope of institutions with appraisal qualifications provided by both parties Article 6 of the "Notice of Chongqing High People's Court on Issuing the Management Regulations for Outsourced Appraisal Work (Trial)" (Yu Gao Fa [2020] No. 48) stipulates: "If the appraisal matters exceed the scope of the" List ", the judicial technical department shall select from relevant professional institutions in this city and solicit the opinions of the parties; the parties may also provide relevant professional institutions in this city to the people's court. The judicial technical department shall conduct a procedural review of the qualifications, integrity, and abilities of the professional institutions. If there are no relevant professional institutions in the city, the judicial technical department shall select from the professional institution lists of other provincial and municipal courts on the People's Court Litigation Asset Network, and the selection procedure shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the first paragraph of this article. If there is still no suitable professional institution in the professional institution roster of other provincial and municipal courts on the People's Court Litigation Asset Network, the selection procedure shall refer to the provisions of the first and second paragraphs of this article to select from relevant professional institutions outside the city

Nevertheless, in judicial practice, there are still grassroots judges who refuse to entrust professional institutions outside the judicial appraisal list to conduct judicial appraisals on the grounds that they are not on the list. In such a situation, the relevant regulations mentioned above, as well as the effective cases allowed by the Supreme People's Court and the superior courts of the trial court to entrust professional institutions for appraisal outside the judicial appraisal list, can be provided to the investigating judge, and efforts can be made to entrust professional institutions outside the judicial appraisal list for appraisal.