Judges in civil cases will be able to refuse to consider evidence produced beyond a certain time limit under a regulation issued Sunday by the Supreme People's Court.

According to the Regulation on Evidence in Civil Lawsuits, failure to produce evidence within the time limit will be considered a renunciation of the right. Cross-examination on any evidence produced afterwards will only be possible with the agreement of the other party in the case.

The time limit for producing evidence will either be jointly decided by the parties in a case or set by the court. If decided by the court, the time limit should be no less than 30 days.

China's current Civil Procedure Law only stipulates parties can produce new evidence in court but is not specific. The vagueness has given rise to increased delay of producing evidence. Some parties in cases avoid handing in evidence before a hearing to gain an advantage in court.

Cao Jianming, vice-president of the Supreme People's Court, said: "This has not only violated the good-faith doctrine but also infringed upon the legitimate rights of the other party. It constitutes an important hurdle to the efficient handling of cases."

Imposing a barrier to efficiency in court is the difficulty of gathering evidence caused by the 10-year-old Civil Procedure Law, which only sets down the principle that parties are obliged to provide evidence to support their allegation but includes no details.

It is not uncommon for courts to help collect evidence in cases where the defendant refuses to co-operate in the gathering of evidence.

The regulation, which will take effect next April, stipulates the defendant is obliged to produce evidence in eight kinds of cases, including alleged patent violations, pollution and faulty products that harm the other parties.

Parties who fail to produce evidence will "bear the disadvantageous consequences," according to the regulation. The regulation also stipulates materials gained by violating others' legitimate rights or through illegal measures will not be considered as evidence.

(China Daily December 31, 2001)