Seven excellent model essays on civil protest applications

Apply for refusal to pay 1

Applicant: a, male,

Applicant: b, female,

Respondent: C, male.

Respondent: Ding, fem

Seven excellent model essays on civil protest applications

Apply for refusal to pay 1

Applicant: a, male,

Applicant: b, female,

Respondent: C, male.

Respondent: Ding, female,

The dispute over the right of way between the applicant and the respondent was tried by Funan County People's Court, and the civil judgment was (20xx) Nan Min Yi Chu ZiNo.. 0 130 1 was made in 20xx 10. Ordering the respondent to have the right of way on the applicant's homestead; 2. Order the applicant to remove obstacles within the above scope within ten days; 3。 And ordered the respondent to pay the applicant compensation of 30,000 yuan. The applicant refused to accept this judgment and appealed to Fuyang Intermediate People's Court according to law. After hearing the case, Fuyang Intermediate People's Court made a civil judgment of (20xx) Fu Min Zhong Yizhino. 0 1282: Items 1, 2 and 4 upheld the judgment of the first instance. Cancel the third item of the first-instance judgment.

The applicant thinks that the original judgment found the facts wrong, and the judge handling the case has human relations, and the judgment result is extremely unfair to the applicant, so he applies to your hospital to lodge a protest against this case according to law.

Reasons for applying for protest:

First, the court of first instance found that the homestead on the east side of the applicant's house was a "public passage", which was a factual error and the respondent did not enjoy the right of way.

1. The court of first instance confirmed the above facts according to the mediation opinions of the People's Mediation Committee of Guankou Township and the certificate of Xiaohe Village Committee of Guankou Township. In fact, the mediation opinions of Guankou Township People's Mediation Committee have no legal effect at all, and it is obviously wrong for the court of first instance to accept the matters identified in the mediation opinions and use them as the basis for judgment. As for the certificate of Xiaohe Village Committee, since the disputed homestead belongs to the management scope of Huaihe River Administration, it is not the land collectively owned by the villagers, and the certificate issued by the village Committee has no legal effect.

2. The above identification of "public access" contradicts the facts admitted by the respondent in court.

During the trial, the respondent Ding admitted that there were only two houses in the east and west when the homestead was originally distributed, and the east side of the house was a slope, and then the homestead was added after the soil was taken from the slope to fill it up. The east of the applicant's house is also Tai Po. After years of leveling, new homestead was added. Later, because the neighbor wang hong asked the applicant for the homestead, the applicant paid a transfer fee of 3,600 yuan to wang hong, and the applicant submitted a sales agreement to the court. The above facts show that the open space on the east side of the house of the party in this case is all newly-added land filled by himself, and it is not a public passage reserved when distributing the foundation of the house. Both parties in this case recognized the above facts, but the court of first instance refused to adopt them, which obviously violated the principle of objective judgment based on facts.

3. The homestead of the applicant and the respondent belongs to the north-south boundary, and the respondent does not enjoy the right of way to the homestead on the east side of the applicant's house.

The foundation of the house here is the kitchen land reserved by the applicant when building a house, which is not a natural north-south passage, and the applicant has never passed through it before tearing down the old and building a new one. The respondent used to pass through the public north-south passage from the right to the west, but now the neighbors in the west are building houses on the east and west sides when building new houses, resulting in the respondent's western passage being blocked. In addition, the residents on the north side of the plaintiff have been traveling westward through the public north-south lane since they built their houses. The respondent can completely open the door in the north of his home and then go west through the expressway.

Second, the court of first instance violated legal procedures and was obviously partial to the defendant.

The fourth page of the original judgment said that "the court obtained evidence ex officio" includes:

1, the applicant's household registration certificate;

2. Mediation opinions of the People's Mediation Committee of Guankou Township;

3. Testimony of Ming-tsai Wu and Guo Guoqiang;

4, on-site inspection records and inspection chart.

"Evidence that the people's court considers necessary for the trial of a case" as stipulated in Article 15 of the Supreme People's Court's Several Provisions on Evidence in the Civil Procedure Law and Article 64 of the Civil Procedure Law refers to the following situations: (1) Facts that may harm national interests, social public interests or the legitimate rights and interests of others; (two) involving the addition of parties ex officio, suspension of litigation, termination of litigation, withdrawal of litigation and other procedural matters unrelated to substantive disputes. Article 16 Except under the circumstances stipulated in Article 15 of these Provisions, the people's court shall investigate and collect evidence at the request of the parties. The evidence of the appeal does not belong to the scope of evidence investigated by the people's court ex officio. The court of first instance violated the above provisions of the Supreme Law, helped the respondent to collect evidence, and was obviously partial to the respondent, resulting in an obviously unfair judgment.

To sum up, the applicant believes that the court of first instance found the facts wrong, the presiding judge handled the case illegally and the judgment was unfair. According to Article 187 of the Civil Procedure Law, the applicant requests your hospital to lodge a protest against this case according to law.

in this regard

XXX people's procuratorate

Applicant: A and B..

Date of application: XXXX, xx, xx, xx.

? Apply for protest 2

Applicant (the third person in the first instance, the appellant in the second instance, the applicant in the third and fourth instance) Wang Zaiming, male, Han nationality,/kloc-0, born on February 7, 962, unemployed. Mailing address: Room 26, Lane 10/0, Leshan Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai,

Postal code: 200030. Contact number * * *

Respondent (plaintiff in first instance, appellee in second instance, respondent in third and fourth instance) Shanghai Kangxing Real Estate Co., Ltd.

Address: No.215 Guilin East Street, Xuhui District, Shanghai

Legal Representative: Zhuang Jieshi, general manager.

Defendant in the original trial: Shanghai Wanchun Waterproof Construction Engineering Company (formerly Jinshan Wanchun Paint Factory)

Address: Wanchun Village, Xia Lang, Jinshan District, Shanghai

Legal Representative: Wang Jianguo, general manager.

(now closed)

Cause of action: housing rental fee dispute

Apply for protest request:

Please ask the Supreme People's Procuratorate's reply to the notice of filing People's Republic of China (PRC) * * * and People's Republic of China (PRC) the Supreme People's Court (20 1 1), Min Jian Zi No.962-1 (attachment1), Shanghai Xuhui District People's Court (1998), Xu Min Zi Chu No.30. And put the applicant's only housing auction into practice, ending the applicant's five-year wandering life in Beijing and returning to Shanghai to live a normal, ordinary and ordinary life.

Facts and reasons:

2011165438+1On October 20th, the applicant received a phone call from Li Hong, vice president of the filing court of Xuhui District Court in Shanghai, requesting the applicant to submit a retrial application to the Supreme Court; On 24th of the same month, according to Li Hong's request, the applicant submitted an application for retrial to Li Ning, the Beijing office of Shanghai High Court (located in the Supreme Court of Hongsi Village, Fengtai District, Beijing). 20 12 On June 4th, President Guo Weihong of Xuhui Court was in the office of President Guo, who personally handed it to the applicant: People's Republic of China (PRC) (20 12) Minjian Zi No.962-1 (attachment1

Because the notice said, "Not satisfied. . . . . . Shanghai Higher People's Court (20 1 1) No.3 Civil Ruling on Rejecting Retrial Application, the applicant has never heard of this ruling, let alone received it. Therefore, the applicant went directly to the Shanghai High Court to ask for it. Judge Xia Lianjun, who received the applicant, clearly told him: "The Shanghai High Court did not issue this ruling No.3; Moreover, the counterpart of the Shanghai High Court is the Second Division of the Supreme Court "(according to the recording). The applicant inquired in the archives of Shanghai Higher People's Court, and Judge Zhu asked the applicant to tell the reception judge of the High Court: "If the computer is zero, they will understand" (subject to the recording).

Reason: because the applicant divorced his working wife in Shanghai Xuhui court, he happened to encounter a dispute over the rental fee between the original defendant and the defendant, and was retaliated by the judge of Xuhui court. Sentenced for the crime of perverting the law: the civil judgment of Shanghai Xuhui Court (1998) Xu Minzichu No.361(Annex 2) was passed by the civil judgment of Shanghai No.1 Intermediate People's Court (1999) and the applicant was added as a third party, taking full responsibility (Annex 5, 2000) /kloc-After 0/0 years, the petition is invalid. 20 10 the applicant was forced to go to Beijing and stayed in Beijing for five years.

The object of this case is the plaintiff (landlord): Shanghai Kangxing Property Co., Ltd. (formerly Xuhui caohejing Housing Management Office), and the defendant (tenant): Shanghai Wanchun Waterproof Construction Engineering Company (formerly Shanghai Jinshan Wanchun Paint Factory) (Annex 6: indictment).

This case perverts the law: First, the subject is wrong. This case is the contractual relationship between two legal persons in housing lease (Appendix 6: Plaintiff's indictment, file 1, 2, 3). It is also a subsequent lease contract between the original and the defendant after the expiration of the first lease contract (Appendix 7: Time of Business License, File 26); The identity of the applicant and the judgments of the first and second instance were confirmed as "employees of Shanghai Wanchun Waterproof Construction Engineering Company". However, he was illegally added as the third person in this case (Annex 5) and assumed full responsibility for this case (Annex 2, File No.59): judgment of first instance).

Second, destroy the truth and forge court records. 1998 The first trial was held on May 12, presided over by Judge Tang Huigen, and the applicant appeared as the defendant's agent. This was the first and only time that the applicant met with Judge Tang so far (Annex 8: Notes on Qu Hongjing, the clerk of the reply card, as evidence preparation column, file: 23 pages). However, in the case file, Tang Huigen's presiding record was changed to1June 8, 1998, instead of May 12, and the defendant was absent (Annex 9, Record of Court Opening, case file: pages 34, 35, 36 and 37).

3. The presiding judge Jin Yi illegally deprived the defendant and the third party of the right to apply for jurisdiction (Annex 10: Transcript of Second Instance, file: 50 pages). Because the domicile of the third party and the domicile of the defendant are both in Jinshan District (formerly Jinshan County), the defendant and the third party submitted a written application for jurisdiction objection on the spot during the trial. The application is still missing from the 1; volume; 2. The presiding judge, Jin Yi, reviewed the exercise of the president's rights and dismissed it in court; Moreover, the procedure of Xuhui court is illegal: the original judge Tang Huigen was replaced by Jin Yi, and the court did not explain the reasons or issue a ruling in court, nor did it mention anything.

4. In the case of housing lease disputes, the judgment is "applicable" to Item 5 of Paragraph 1 of Article 58 of the General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC): "in violation of legal provisions or social public interests"; Seventh, "Cover up the illegal purpose in a legal form" (Appendix III Judgment, page 59 of the file), the judges of the second instance and the third instance defended each other and upheld the original judgment.

5. The judicial procedure is illegal. The so-called "collegiate bench is formed according to law" (Appendix 2: Judgment, file page 59) Judge Zhang Dingchen and Judge Luo Taoer. So far, applicants still don't know whether they are male or not. Or a woman? Are you fat? Still thin? Are you a spirit or a human?

6. Judge Jin Yi issued the acknowledgement of service in the name of the applicant (attachment 1 1, file No.23).

Therefore, I request your court to protest in accordance with the law, and return the applicant to justice, fairness and justice!

I am here to convey

the supreme people's procuratorate,prc

Applicant: Wang Zaiming.

Apply for protest 3

Applicant (defendant in the original trial): xxx, male, Han nationality, born on May 22nd, 1962, xxx, farmer, now living at No.47-1in Hedi District, Nanbai Village.

Respondent (plaintiff in the original trial): xxx, male, Han nationality,1born on March 26th, 973, a farmer in xxx village, now living at No.38-1in Xitou District, Nanbai Village.

Request for protest: Request the xx People's Procuratorate to lodge a protest against the civil judgment of the xx People's Court (20xx) Yu Min Zi Chu No.53, request the court to cancel the judgment and reject the plaintiff's claim.

Facts and reasons:

First, the basic facts of this case:

In 20xx, the applicant purchased 80 mu of barren land suitable for forest in Linangou village with the following ticket, and obtained the contracted management right of Linangou 16.5 mu of land by circulation, accounting for 96.5 mu. With the consent of the village Committee, the forestry department passed the acceptance. In 20xx, the Ministry of Forestry issued a forest right certificate to the applicant, indicating the scope and service life of the four districts. In 20xx, the land contractor adjacent to the applicant, that is, the respondent, changed the land use beyond the scope of business without the consent of the village Committee, turned the original cultivated land into forest land, and planted poplars in a small canal in the middle of the plot adjacent to the applicant. Due to the fast growth speed and well-developed root system of poplar, the normal growth of the applicant's walnut tree was seriously affected, resulting in the delayed fruiting of the tree, which seriously affected the applicant's economic benefits and caused great losses to the applicant. In order to safeguard the interests of the applicant and avoid the losses of the respondent, the applicant shall not hire an excavator to dig a small canal with a width of 80cm and a depth of about 1m in 20xx year1month, so as to cut off part of the root system of poplar and prevent the respondent's poplar from causing greater losses to the applicant.

Second, the court of first instance found the facts wrong.

1. It is wrong for the court of first instance to find that the applicant's canal digging behavior constitutes infringement.

Although the court of first instance raised the controversial focus of this case and whether the respondent's tree planting behavior was legal, it did not identify the key facts of this case when determining the facts of this case. Whether the defendant's tree planting behavior is legal or not is the key to this case.

If the tree planting behavior of the respondent is illegal, then the behavior taken by the applicant belongs to legitimate defense against the illegal behavior, and the applicant does not bear any legal responsibility.

If the respondent's tree planting behavior is legal, the applicant should bear legal responsibilities beyond the necessary limits, so the respondent's tree planting behavior is legal, which is one of the keys to this case, but the court of first instance did not recognize this key fact.

The fact is that when hearing this case, the evidence provided by the plaintiff is the certificate issued by the village Committee. This evidence can neither prove that the respondent has the right to manage the forest land nor prove that the applicant has the ownership of the forest land. Article 64 of the Civil Procedure Law stipulates that "the parties have the responsibility to provide evidence for their own claims." If the parties can't prove their claims, they will bear the risk of losing the case. In this case, the respondent did not provide any evidence to prove that the poplar belongs to his legal property. Naturally, if the tree does not belong to the respondent, the applicant has no right to claim his rights. And the evidence provided by the applicant at the trial bought the village Committee's shortage.

The agreement, land use certificate and forest right certificate can fully prove that the respondent's behavior belongs to infringement, and the photos provided by the applicant prove that the respondent's trees have caused considerable losses to the applicant, and the trenching adopted by the applicant belongs to self-defense and does not bear any legal responsibility.

3. It is wrong for the court of first instance to order the applicant to compensate the respondent for the loss of trees caused by the infringement of the applicant, which belongs to the error of applicable law.

The reason is: in this case, the applicant's behavior belongs to self-defense, and the way he took did not exceed the necessary limit and did not cause losses to the respondent. Therefore, according to the provisions of Article 128 of the General Principles of the Civil Law, the applicant does not bear any legal responsibility.

To sum up, the respondent turned the farmland into farmland without the consent of the village committee, knowing that the farmland could not be turned into woodland casually, and planted trees on the land that he did not have the right to use. Moreover, the trees planted directly harm the interests of others and cause damage to others. The court of first instance found that the facts and judgments were illegal, and drew lessons from Articles 179 and 187 of China's Civil Procedure Law.

Apply for protest 4

Applicant: * * *, male, Han nationality, born on * * * * * village, Shandong Province, and now lives in * * * * * district.

Respondent: Binzhou Dongsheng Carpet Co., Ltd.

Address: Area code of Huimin County Development Zone.

Request: Withdraw the request

The general loan contract dispute case between the applicant and the respondent shall be subject to the ruling of the wordNo. in the early Republic of China. Huimin County People's Court (20xx) ruled that the applicant refused to accept the ruling of the first instance and appealed to Binzhou Intermediate People's Court, which rejected the appeal and upheld the original judgment on the grounds that the repayment voucher provided by the applicant had no official seal. The applicant thinks that the evidence for ascertaining the facts is insufficient, and according to the provisions of Article 185 of the Civil Procedure Law, he applies and requests the people's procuratorate to lodge a protest.

First, the final ruling found that the factual evidence was insufficient.

The final ruling found that the repayment voucher provided by the applicant was not supported without the official seal. Due to the chaotic internal management of Cai Xia Carpet Group Co., Ltd. at that time, some documents were only signed by the payee, and the payee could testify in court as a witness, but the court made a final judgment without summoning witnesses to testify in court.

Therefore, it is unreasonable that the final ruling finds that the repayment voucher provided by the applicant cannot be supported without the official seal.

Second, the Court of Final Appeal wrongly applied the law.

The final ruling found that the signature of the applicant's wife on the statement had the same legal effect. According to Article 66 of the General Principles of Civil Law, an act without agency, beyond agency or after agency termination can only bear civil liability if it is ratified by the principal. Knowing that another person has committed a civil act in his own name without denying it is deemed as consent. The applicant denied his wife's signature in court, so the signature on the statement has no legal effect.

Therefore, the application of the law is wrong, so it is submitted to the procuratorate for protest.

This demonstration

* * * * Court

Applicant: * * *

20XX years 1 1 month

Apply for protest 5

Applicant: XXX lives in XXX.

The applicant refuses to accept the criminal incidental civil judgmentNo. (20xx) 193 of Wuling District People's Court of Changde City, Hunan Province, and hereby applies to your hospital for bringing a lawsuit according to the provisions of Article 182 of the People's Republic of China (PRC) Procedural Law. The reason for this is the following：

First, the court of first instance found that the facts were unclear. The court of first instance found out at night: "Pan Xin and his cousin Lu Yifa had a fierce quarrel over trivial matters. When they walked to the door of the New Century Business Hotel, the defendant Yang Tao stepped forward to dissuade them. Lu Yifa did not listen to dissuasion and had a quarrel with the defendant Yang Tao. In the process of doing so, the defendant Yang Tao took out a folding jumping knife that he carried with him and stabbed the victim Lu Yifa to the ground. " This is inconsistent with the objective facts. First of all, although the victim Lu Yifa had a quarrel with Pan Xin Pan Xinfa, there was no evidence to prove that the quarrel was "fierce". Secondly, the defendant Yang Tao did not come forward to dissuade him, but helped Pan Xin quarrel with the victim Lu Yifa and killed him with a knife. Although persuaded by others, he still broke free and stabbed the victim in the chest and abdomen continuously, and finally Lu Yifa died. Defendant Yang Tao always stressed in the investigation, examination and trial that it was because the victim Lu Yifa "pinched my neck", but all the evidence in the trial failed to confirm this plot. Therefore, although the defendant Lu Yifa and Yang Tao voluntarily surrendered to the public security organs, they failed to tell the truth about their happiness and should not be considered as surrendering themselves.

Second, the trial procedure of the court of first instance is improper. In this case, the evidence provided by the public prosecution agency 6: surveillance video. This evidence can prove the basic facts of the case, but the court of first instance does not play a role in the trial. How to cross-examine if you don't fight?

Third, the court of first instance imposed a light sentence on the defendant Yang Tao. Paragraph 2 of Article 234 of the Criminal Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) "Whoever causes death or serious injury by particularly cruel means and causes serious disability shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 10 years, life imprisonment or death". Defendant Yang Tao stabbed the victim in the chest and abdomen with a knife to help his friend Pan Xin who had a quarrel with the victim Lu Yifa. What is rare is that his methods are cruel and his behavior is bad. After stabbing the victim, he did not implement rescue and fled. In order to escape the attack of the public security organs, he surrendered himself but did not truthfully confess his criminal facts.

Defendant Yang Tao refused to compensate for economic losses and should be severely punished. As of the verdict of the first instance, the defendant and his family had no remorse. In the process of rescuing the victims, they not only failed to save a penny, but also failed to show the slightest sincerity in the adjustment process presided over by the court. The applicant has not received any compensation. The defendant's criminal behavior caused extremely serious pain to the applicant and his family. This can't be measured by money. However, the defendant and his family ignored the applicant's pain, not only refused to pay compensation, but tried every means to exploit the loopholes of Confucius. If such a guilty attitude can be used as a sentencing circumstance of a lighter punishment, it is really a shame of the law, a farce of the society, and the sorrow of the victims! To sum up, the applicant believes that the first-instance judgment found the facts unclear, the applicable law was wrong, and the sentencing was improper. I hereby apply to your hospital for bringing a lawsuit.

I am here to convey

Wuling district procuratorate

Applicant:

Apply for protest 6

Applicant: Zhang Jianjun, 20th1Feb19th.

Applicant: * * *, male, Han nationality, born on * * * * * village, Shandong Province, and now lives in * * * * * district.

Respondent: Binzhou Dongsheng Carpet Co., Ltd.

Address: Area code of Huimin County Development Zone.

Request: Withdraw the request

The general loan contract dispute case between the applicant and the respondent shall be subject to the ruling of the wordNo. in the early Republic of China. Huimin County People's Court (20xx) ruled that the applicant refused to accept the ruling of the first instance and appealed to Binzhou Intermediate People's Court, which rejected the appeal and upheld the original judgment on the grounds that the repayment voucher provided by the applicant had no official seal. The applicant thinks that the evidence for ascertaining the facts is insufficient, and according to the provisions of Article 185 of the Civil Procedure Law, he applies and requests the people's procuratorate to lodge a protest.

First, the final ruling found that the factual evidence was insufficient.

The final ruling found that the repayment voucher provided by the applicant was not supported without the official seal. Due to the chaotic internal management of Cai Xia Carpet Group Co., Ltd. at that time, some documents were only signed by the payee, and the payee could testify in court as a witness, but the court made a final judgment without summoning witnesses to testify in court.

Therefore, it is unreasonable that the final ruling finds that the repayment voucher provided by the applicant cannot be supported without the official seal.

Second, the Court of Final Appeal wrongly applied the law.

The final ruling found that the signature of the applicant's wife on the statement had the same legal effect. According to Article 66 of the General Principles of Civil Law, an act without agency, beyond agency or after agency termination can only bear civil liability if it is ratified by the principal. Knowing that another person has committed a civil act in his own name without denying it is deemed as consent. The applicant denied his wife's signature in court, so the signature on the statement has no legal effect.

Therefore, the application of the law is wrong, so it is submitted to the procuratorate for protest.

This demonstration

Apply for protest 7

If the court of first instance sentences the death penalty, it shall not be executed immediately, and the reason for suspending execution for two years is untenable. The reason for this is the following：

First, the direct purpose of the death penalty in criminal law is: the crime is heinous, the means are cruel and the circumstances are bad. It is not enough to make the people angry without the death penalty. I ask everyone, including the judges of the first instance and the judges of the High Court, to take a look at the crimes committed by the defendants and their means and circumstances, and whether they are in line with the heinous crimes, cruel means and bad circumstances!

Second, look at the specific circumstances of his heinous crime, cruel means and bad circumstances: according to the facts identified in the first-instance judgment, it can be summarized as the following key words: holding a grudge because of quarreling, retaliating, stalking, entering the house, punching the victim's face, struggling the victim, trapping the victim's face with pliers, immobilizing the victim's head, and stabbing the victim's lower part (that is, vagina) with a broom. It can be seen that the defendant's purpose is that the victim not only wants to die, but also suffers more pain than death in the process of death. How vicious is his subjective malignancy? Is it in line with the legislative purpose of criminal law not to sentence him to death immediately? Definitely not worthy!

Third, the criminal pleaded guilty when a large amount of evidence could not be denied. How can such a confession be regarded as a mitigating circumstance?

Fourth, the criminal's family offered compensation of 30,000 yuan in exchange for mitigating circumstances; However, the victim died so miserably and his family suffered so much that it is possible to ask the criminals for 30 thousand yuan. The applicant absolutely does not want, but only seeks the existence of conscience, affection, justice and fairness to comfort the spirit of heaven and the hearts of parents. Based on this, we give up any compensation to criminals and their families and don't want any money from them. We must sentence them to death immediately!

Applicant: * * *

20xx65438+February 20th.