In 2017, 976 new enforcement cases were accepted and 1001 enforcement cases were closed. This shows increases of 83 cases and 314 cases respectively compared with 893 cases and 687 cases in the last year. With number of enforcement officers remaining unchanged, averagely over 280 cases were closed by one officer in the year, and at most 364 cases. Clearance rate of enforcement cases was 72.78% and actual enforcement rate was 83.56%, which showed certain increases compared with 63.2% and 71.19% in the last year. Both the enforcement efficiency and effect had great escalation. As the number of pending enforcement cases decreased to 374 from 400 in the last year, and it is expectable that number of new enforcement cases accepted in 2018 will further decrease considering the significant decrease in number of contentious cases closed by judgment in 2017, pressure for enforcement will be somewhat relieved.

This significant improvement of enforcement efficiency and effect in 2017 could be credited with the following reasons, in addition to smooth close of serveral serial cases

1. Improved informatization of enforcement proceedings. This promoted significant reformation of three work mechanisms in enforcement proceedings. Firstly, by use of China national “head office to head office” inquiry and control system, Fujian provincial “point to point” inquiry and control system and Xiamen’s local inquiry and control system, the Court managed to “capture” all major properties of enforcement respondents. A major reformwas brought to the work mechanism for “person identification and property inquiry”. Secondly, the Court worked hard to promote online judicial auction, substantially reforming auction mechanism. In 2017, the Court carried out 70 auctions on Taobao site, including 43 times for auction and sale of 29 ships in which 22 were successfully sold off, with total proceeds being RMB 326 million. Rate of online auction of ships reached 100%. Last, the Court began using keypoint flow management system in enforcement proceedings, and using informatization platform, allowing parties’ access to the information of keypoint flow of enforcement proceedings. The enforcement management and supervision mechanism was reformed significantly. The Court began to employ “one account for one case” system, to keep records of, disclose and accept supervision during the entire course of collection and payout of enforcement proceeds.

2. Improved management of proceeds and property of enforcement. The Court began to employ “one account for one case” system, to keep records of, disclose and accept supervision during the entire course of collection and payout of enforcement proceeds.  

3. Stricter implementation of measures to terminate current enforcement proceedings. The Court made a ledger of all cases whose current enforcement proceedings were terminated. Based on the ledger, officers investigated case by case the property possession situation of all persons subject to enforcement, including their realties, automobiles, bank accounts and BIC files, under supervision of director of enforcement division The property investigation results were reported in a monthly manner, and once any property available for enforcement was found, the enforcement would be resumed without delay. In 2017, there were 107 enforcement cases were closed by termination of current enforcement proceedings, showing the rate of termination of current enforcement proceedings decreased to 8.18%.

4.Enhanced communication and coordination. In complicated cases, the Court enhanced communication and coordination among and interpretation of law and reasoning to parties concerned, interested parties, entities providing assistance, and authorities in charge of relevant industries, to improve their understanding as to the enforcement work and their support and credit to the justice, resolve disputes effectively and facilitate discharge of debts.

(IV) The total value of subject matters of new contentious cases accepted showed notable decrease, and great decrease was witnessed in the number of cases closed by judgment

Though more new contentious cases were accepted in 2017, cases involving high amount accounted for a fewer proportion. Therefore, compared with 2016, the total valueof subject matters of the cases accepted in 2017 had a decrease of over 50%, and returned to thenormal level of previous years. Throughout the year of 2017, 340 contentious cases were closed by judgment, showing a relatively great decrease of 38.6% from the 554 cases in 2016. Although the total number of judgments decreased, the profession degree and complexity of the issues in dispute increased. 

In 2017, there were 42 cases left over from previous years involving foreign,Hong Kong, Macau orTaiwan elements and 586 new cases accepted (including 7 Taiwan-related cases, 30 Hong Kong-related cases, and 549 foreign-related cases). By the end of 2017, 594 cases involving such elements have beenclosed, and 34 cases remained pending before the Court, showing a clearance rate of 94.59%. Compared with the last year when 143 new cases involving such elements were accepted, 443 more new cases were accepted in 2017, and it wasbe attributable to two large series of foreign-related cases(including 503 cases). If these serial cases were not taken into consideration, number of cases involving such elements would become 83, showing a decrease from that in the last yearinstead. 

In 2017, facing substantial increase of caseload and workload, the Court intensified overall work arrangement, properly allocated judicial resources and optimized work methodsto accomplish tasks well. Except clearancerate of cases left over from previous years and rate of compliance in enforcement proceedings, the Court met theother six managementindicators set byFujian Higher People’s Court, which showed aprogress compared with those in the last year. As to the trialmanagementindicator additionally set for the clearanceof long pending cases, the Court also had good performance. 

In 2017, the Court constantly enhanced the power of hastening the trial of cases and strictly controlled approval of applications for change of trial time limits. The clearance rate ofcasewithin statutory time limit for trial reached 99.28%, satisfying the requirement of the Higher People’s Court of Fujian Province and exceeding the rate of 97.96% in the last year. Throughout the year, there were 6 cases not closed within statutory trial time limits, but they were closed within the extended time limits. More attention must be paid to this regard to improve management of cases in the future. 

In 2017, the rate of amendment of judgmentand remand for retrial of first instance caseshandled bythe Court was 3.97%, meeting the requirement set by theHigher People’s Court of Fujian Province. As 2017 drew to a close, the Court saw 12 cases ofwhich judgments were amended in the second instance, which was the same with 2016. Nevertheless, as the Court closed 302 firstinstance cases by judgment in 2017, a decrease in number of 251 compared with 553 in the last year, the rate of amendment of judgment and remand for retrial of first instance casesin 2017 was lower than the rate of 2.35% in the last year. 

In the cases ofwhich judgments were amended in 2017, two thirds were thoseappealed and transferred to the higher court in 2016. In 2017, there were 129 cases of the Court appealed and transferred to the higher court, including 30 cases concerning dissension on jurisdiction, and only 99 cases appealed against thejudgments, showing a great decrease compared withthe number of last year. Therefore, it is expected the number of cases whose judgments areamended and remanded for retrial will further decrease in 2018. 

In 2017, the rate of acceptance of effective judgments rendered by the Courtreached100%, and the rate of communication in enforcement cases also reached100%. In 2017, no effective judgment issued by the Courtwas retried by the Higher People’s Court of Fujian Province. The enforcement proceedings were in general compliance with legal provisions in terms of time limit and manner of close, and channels of communications inenforcement proceedings were maintained unblocked. 

At the end of December 2017, it was calculated out 1.2 months would be taken to close the pending cases on the basis of the average monthly number of cases closed in the previous 12 months, which satisfied the requirement set bythe Higher People’s Court of Fujian Province. This requirement was met for the first time after failure for consecutive three years. It should be mainly credited with the more reasonable calculation standards after adjustment according to the changes in the number of cases accepted in these years.  

In 2017, by full use of diversified dispute resolution mechanism, the Court took more efforts to facilitate dispute resolution by mediation, and achieveddistinguished good results. Particularly, the above-mentionedtwo large series of cases (including over 500 cases) were finally resolved by and between the parties under mediation. In respect of contentious cases, the rate of mediation and voluntary dismissal reached 68.74% in 2017, showing a substantial increase compared withthe rate of 41.92% in the last year, and satisfyingthe requirement of the Higher People’s Court of Fujian Province. 

At the beginning of 2017, there were 164 cases left over from previous years, of which, by the end of the year, 137 cases has been closed and 27 cases remained unclosed. The clearance rate of cases left over from previous yearswas83.54%, showing a decrease of 2.78% compared with the rate of 86.32% in 2016, but still failed to meet relevantrequirement. In the 27 cases remaining unclosed (including 8 cases involving foreign, Hong Kong, Macau or Taiwan elements), there were12 cases ordered to be suspended, and the remaining’s proceedings were delayed mainly due to objective reasons such as appraisal, announcement and court service, notwithstanding that some appraisals indeed took two much time and case investigation progressed tardily. 

In 2017, as required by the Higher People’s Court of Fujian Province, the Courtdid the best toexpedite disposal oflong pending cases and accomplished the mission. By present, there are only 4 cases pending for 2~3 years remaining unclosed, and no cases pending for over 3 years. 

In 2017, the rate of actual enforcement reached 83.56% and satisfied the general requirement set bythe Higher People’s Court of Fujian Province. In 2017,auctions of ships were speeded up,the rate of successful auction was increased, and a high proportion of crew salary-related serial cases were closed upon enforcement by means of auction of ships. Therefore, this rate kept rising from2016 (see the table below), and it is expected to keep at a high level in 2018 considering the minor rally of ocean freight rate and the smooth conduct of ship auctions. 

The indexes of average trial time and average enforcement time are two indexes used to assess a court’s work efficiency—the higher the indexes are, the shorter the time to dispose a case is. In 2017, the index of average trial time of the Court was 0.81 and the index of average enforcement time was 0.49, showing a minor growth from the indexes 0.78 and 0.4 in the last year, and reflecting that the Court had improvedwork efficiency in trials and enforcements. 

In 2017, the Court closed 1035 first-instance cases under ordinary proceedings, in which 480 cases had juror participate, making the rate of juror participation increase by 22.46%to 46.38% from the rate of 23.92% in the last year. The participation of people’s juror helps promote judicial justice, improve credibility of justice and relieve judicial resource tensiondue to shortage of judges. 

2017 witnessed the reformation of three courtrooms thatallowed live broadcasting of court hearings on Chinese court website (http://tingshen.court.gov.cn/live). In 2017, 70 hearings of the Court were live broadcasted, showing a notable increase in number from less than 10 hearings in the last year. 

In 2017, there were 2055 judgments of the Court published online. As shown in the system of online publication of judgments, by the end of 2017, no effective judgment so required has failed to be published online. The Court had good performance in this regard. 

By the end of 2017, 93.6% of the case files of the Courthave been prepared electronically. In order to increase the applicationof electronic documentation in trials, the next step is to enhance the synchronous preparation of electronic files, to ensure they are generated at the same time whena case is accepted.  

In 2017, files of 3155 cases were archived. By the end of February 2018, there were 647 cases that had been closed for more than two months and should have had files archived. Especially for the enforcement cases and cases tried under special procedures, the archiving work was still onerous.  

The most important function of a people’s court is to enforce the law and trial of cases. In order to accomplish tasks and satisfy requirements in future trials, it is advised that the adjudicatory function should be furtherenhanced and the quality and efficiency of trial should be improvedin the process of furtherreforming ofthe judicial system and strengthening of informatization, to such an extent that the increasing needs of justice in the society are satisfied better and people feel justice and fairness in every case.  

 (I) Enhance professional researches and discussions. Take into consideration of diversity and complexity of legal relationships, focus on the key issues, hot issues and difficult issues in cases, deepen trial researches and studies, attach importance to study on professional issues, procedural issues and issues related to application of substantive laws, fully exert the function of specialized meetings of judges to assemble wisdoms to discuss difficult and complicated legal issues, especially those soliciting divergent judge opinions in similar cases, promote refined trial in every case, push forward the harmonization of adjudication standards, and further upgrade adjudication quality.