英文摘要 |
This ruling of the Supreme Court interprets the Commercial Case Adjudication Act in a constitutionality way with an eye to ensure the creditor’s right to claim for provisional measures of protection and the debtor’s procedural guarantees, with its conclusion permits the party to present new evidence that may make the court to deny either the right which is in need of provisional protection, or the necessity of provisional measures of protection. However, this ruling still upholds the idea that the Supreme Court is the trial of law, thus it must reverse and remand the rulings of the original instance. In order to strike a balance between the creditor’s provisional protection of rights, the debtor’s right to be heard and the maintenance of the Supreme Court as the trail of law, the original court should re-examine the interlocutory appeal, so as to make the trial timely and appropriate and to avoid unexpected verdicts. |