Both the second instance and the first instance were judged in the same way, so can there be a re ar

There is a possibility of a retrial, that is, both the first instance and the second instance have been found to be wrong.

Not the original judge.

Remand for retrial is remand to the jurisdiction of the original people's court, but it is necessary to form a separate collegial panel, and the original judge needs to recuse himself.

Remanding for retrial is a procedural provision for the court to hear a case. It was the court of second instance who, after hearing the appeal case of the first instance, held that the facts found in the judgment of the court of first instance were unclear and the evidence insufficient; or the first-instance judgment violates legal procedures and may affect the correct judgment of the case; or the first-instance judgment omitted four reasons, such as the person who repented and the litigation claim; A trial system in which the court of second instance makes a ruling to revoke the judgment of the first instance and remand the case to the court of first instance for retrial.

Since the court of first instance may violate the mandatory provisions of the law on trial rules, and the legitimate rights and interests of the parties cannot be safeguarded if it is not remanded for a new trial, it needs to be remanded to the original court for trial in accordance with the procedures of first instance.

Remand for retrial is a remedy in which some issues in the original trial were not ascertained, or some issues were omitted, and this is a legal procedure, and in order to prevent the judgment from being unfair, it will not affect the original judge of the first instance.

To sum up, if the plaintiff loses the case in the first instance and the plaintiff appeals, the Intermediate People's Court rules to remand the case for retrial, and the plaintiff still loses the case after the retrial, if the plaintiff wants to appeal, it shall be allowed in accordance with the law, and the Intermediate Court must accept it.

[Legal basis].

Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China

Article 41:

People's courts hearing second-instance civil cases are to form a collegial panel of adjudicators.

The number of members of the collegial panel must be an odd number.

In a second-instance civil case where the intermediate people's court concludes the first-instance trial using the summary procedures or appeals against a ruling, where the facts are clear and the rights and obligations are clear, a single adjudicator may hear the case with the consent of both parties.

In cases remanded for new trial, the original people's court shall separately form a collegial panel in accordance with the first-instance trial procedures.

In retrial cases, where the trial was originally the first instance, a separate collegial panel is to be formed in accordance with the first-instance trial procedures;

Where it was originally a second-instance trial or a higher level people's court, a collegial panel is to be formed separately in accordance with the second-instance trial procedures.

Where the first-instance appraisal is accepted through cross-examination, the second-instance trial principle makes it clear that the appraisal must not be re-evaluated.

1. Where the facts found in the original judgment are correct, the evidence is credible and sufficient, the law is correctly applied, and the sentence is appropriate, a ruling shall be made to reject the appeal or prosecutorial counter-appeal and uphold the original judgment. 2. Where the original judgment found that there was no error in the application of law or the sentencing was improper, the second-instance trial court shall revoke the original judgment and make a new judgment, and explain the basis and reasons for the change in the judgment. 3. Where the facts of the original judgment are unclear or the evidence is insufficient, the court of second instance may change the judgment after clarifying the facts, or may rule to revoke the original judgment and remand it to the original court for new trial.

1. Let's put it this way, if the second instance is remanded for retrial, it means that there are procedural or substantive problems in the case, and of course these problems may not affect the outcome of the case.

2. If the second instance is remanded for retrial, and those who are not satisfied after the retrial may appeal.

3. As for how the appeal will be judged after the retrial, I personally think that it is necessary to start with the case itself. First of all, there are many cases of remand for retrial, so the key is to see whether the error of the first instance has much to do with the result. If it is big, it is more likely that the sentence will be changed, and if it is not, it is more likely that the original will be maintained.

If you are still not satisfied, you can appeal to the Provincial High Court again, and the Provincial High Court can hear it or remand for a new trial.

If a case has been retried after the first instance and the second instance, and the retrial ruling remands the case to the original trial court for retrial, the original trial court is the court of first instance and re-tries the case in accordance with the procedures of the first instance.

A retrial is a case in which the court of first instance finds that the court of first instance or, after a second instance or retrial by a higher court.

The court of first and second instance ruled to remand for a new trial in the judgment that the facts were erroneous or unclear, the evidence was insufficient or the legal procedures were violated, and the fair trial of the case might be affected.

Remand to the court of first instance for retrial, and the case is restored to the original state when the plaintiff filed the lawsuit, and the retrial is generally conducted by a separate panel of the court of first instance, and the parties may be added; The court of first instance shall retry the case in accordance with the ordinary procedures of the first instance, and proceed in sequence according to the procedures of presenting evidence, debating evidence, debate, mediation, and judgment. Parties (including newly added parties) may appeal against the judgment.

The retrial court remanded the case to the court of second instance for retrial, and the court of second instance remanded the case for retrial, and after the judgment of the first instance, if the court appealed to the second instance and was dissatisfied with the judgment of the second instance, could it still apply for a retrial3

Article 207:In cases retried by people's courts in accordance with the trial supervision procedures, where the legally effective judgment or ruling was made by the first-instance trial court, the parties may appeal the judgment or ruling made in accordance with the first-instance trial procedures; A judgment or ruling that takes legal effect is made by a court of second-instance trial, and is tried in accordance with the procedures of the second-instance trial, and the judgment or ruling made is a judgment or ruling that takes legal effect; Where a higher level people's court arraigns for trial in accordance with the trial supervision procedures, it is to be tried in accordance with the second-instance trial procedures, and the judgment or ruling made is a legally effective judgment or ruling.

People's courts hearing retrial cases shall separately form a collegial panel.

In short, depending on which court made the effective judgment, the remand for a new trial is the remand to the court that made the effective judgment.

It is necessary to analyze the express indication of the retrial court for retrial.