[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, applying for a retrial requires satisfying both substantive and procedural conditions. The substantive condition is that the case must fall into the statutory grounds for retrial. According to Article 206 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2023 and implemented on January 1, 2024), if the applicant's request meets any of the following circumstances, the people's court shall grant a retrial: there is new evidence sufficient to overturn the original judgment or ruling; the basic facts determined in the original judgment or ruling lack evidence to support them; the law applied in the original judgment or ruling contains errors; the facts determined in the original judgment or ruling and the law applied are incorrect, but the evidence provided by the applicant for the retrial is insufficient to overturn them; the litigation procedures violate the law and may affect the fair judgment of the case; the composition of the trial organization does not comply with the law, or the members who should have recused themselves according to the law did not do so; or other circumstances deemed requiring a retrial. The procedural condition is the subject and time limit of the application: parties, interested persons, and other citizens who are legally entitled to apply for a retrial may apply, but third parties with independent rights of claim who have not been adjudicated as parties may also apply; the application shall be submitted within six months after the judgment or ruling takes legal effect. It should be noted that the circumstances in which the people's court shall grant a retrial are different from those in which a retrial may be granted. In the former case, the retrial shall be initiated, while in the latter case, the statutory grounds still need to be reviewed to determine whether there are actual errors. For reference, please refer to the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2023 and implemented on January 1, 2024). 北京地区申请再审需要同时满足实体条件和程序条件。实体条件是必须落入法定再审事由。根据《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》（2023年修正，2024年1月1日施行）第二百零六条，有下列情形之一的，人民法院应当再审：有新的证据，足以推翻原判决、裁定的；原判决、裁定认定的基本事实缺乏证据证明的；原判决、裁定适用的法律确有错误的；原判决、裁定认定事实和适用法律错误，申请再审的证据不足以推翻的；违反法定诉讼程序，可能影响案件公正裁判的；审判组织的组成不符合法律规定，或者依法应当回避的成员没有回避的；其他应当再审的情形。程序条件是申请主体和期限：当事人、利害关系人以及依法可以申请再审的公民等可以申请，但未被判决的当事人有独立请求权的第三人也可以申请；申请应当在判决、裁定发生法律效力后六个月内提出。需要注意的是，人民法院应当再审的情形和可以再审的情形不同，前者应当启动再审，后者仅是法定事由，仍需审查是否确有错误。可参考Special services and other casesThe service description in the column.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

Most of those who consult this issue are parties who believe there were errors in the judgment that has already taken effect. There are three common situations: the first-instance court's findings lack evidence to support them; the second-instance court made obvious errors in applying the law; and neither the first- nor second-instance courts addressed the key evidence submitted by the parties. In practice, the most common misconception is regarding the retrial as a supplementary means of ordinary appeal, believing that as long as there are new claims, an application can be made. In reality, the review standards for retrial are much stricter, requiring both the existence of statutory grounds and the degree of actual errors. Therefore, before applying for retrial, it is necessary to evaluate whether the errors are sufficiently obvious, whether there is evidence that can be submitted, and whether the time limit has not yet expired. Another common misunderstanding is that applying for retrial does not affect the enforcement of the original judgment, unless the court orders a stay of enforcement in accordance with the law.

II. Key points of contention

The first focus is the specific application of the statutory grounds for retrial. The second focus is the definition of new evidence and the timing of its submission. The third focus is the standard for determining that the basic facts lack evidence to prove them. The fourth focus is the criterion for judging whether the application of the law is incorrect. The fifth focus is whether procedural violations may affect fair adjudication. The sixth focus is the time limit and starting point for applying for retrial. The seventh focus is the connection between the level of retrial and the procedure. The eighth focus is the relationship between the enforcement of the original judgment and the retrial. The procedural connection ideas can be referred to for reference.Business and contract disputes in enterprisesThe description of the column.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

Judging from the experience of handling retrial cases, the key to success lies in three aspects: First, the type of statutory grounds for retrial. Different grounds require different review standards. For example, violations of trial procedures and the lack of evidence to prove basic facts are relatively easier to be reviewed, while the simple non-acceptance of judgment reasoning is usually difficult to constitute grounds for retrial. Second, the form and submission timing of evidence. New evidence must be objectively unavailable during the original trial process and capable of overturning the original judgment. If the court simply failed to accept the original evidence, it is generally not considered new evidence. Third, timing management. The deadline for applying for retrial is usually within six months after the judgment takes effect. At the same time, attention should be paid to the choice of procedures at the first and second instance stages, as the remedies available at different stages are different. Therefore, when handling such cases, lawyers usually first conduct a paragraph-by-paragraph analysis of the original judgment to determine whether there are obvious errors, and then decide whether to apply for retrial or seek remedies through other means.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

Action recommendations: 1. Conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the original judgment to determine whether there are statutory grounds for retrial. 2. Organize the evidence submitted in the original trial but not admitted. 3. Collect new evidence that was objectively unavailable during the original trial. 4. Calculate the application deadline and establish a timeline database. 5. Assess whether there were procedural omissions during the first or second instance. 6. Evaluate the enforcement status of the original judgment and consider applying for property preservation or enforcement measures. 7. Assess the feasibility and cost of retrial before applying. Legal basis: Articles 206, 211, and 212 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2023 and implemented on January 1, 2024) regarding grounds for retrial, application subjects, and application deadlines; Provisions related to the judicial supervision procedure shall be based on the currently effective version.

5. Henglue Law Firm's Reminder

First, the review standards for retrial are strict, and it is not a supplement to ordinary appeals. Second, the new evidence must be evidence that was objectively impossible to obtain during the original trial. Third, the reasons for procedural violations need to be explained as they may affect the fairness of the judgment. Fourth, the time limit is usually six months after the judgment takes effect, and it is essential to act in a timely manner. Fifth, applying for retrial does not affect the enforcement of the original judgment, and property risks need to be considered. Sixth, mediation and remedies outside litigation also need to be evaluated together as another remedy path, and they should be evaluated together. Seventh, the success rates of different remedy paths vary significantly, and a case-by-case evaluation is needed. For specific review standards, please refer to the relevant provisions.Special services and other casesColumn.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: What are the requirements for applying for a rehearing?

Two conditions must be met simultaneously: first, the case must fall under one of the statutory grounds for retrial, such as the original judgment lacking evidence to support the findings of fact, errors in the application of the law, procedural violations, or illegal composition of the trial organization; second, the request must be submitted by an eligible party within the statutory time limit, which is generally within six months after the judgment or ruling takes effect. Both conditions are indispensable. Even if the grounds for retrial are valid but the time limit has passed, the people's court will no longer accept the request. For a complete list of such grounds, please refer to the relevant document.Business and contract disputes in enterprisesColumn.

Q2: In which circumstances should the court conduct a rehearing?

There are mainly six categories: there is new evidence sufficient to overturn the original judgment; the basic facts identified in the original judgment lack evidence to prove them; the law applied in the original judgment is indeed wrong; the facts identified in the original judgment and the application of the law are wrong, and the evidence for applying for a retrial is not sufficient to overturn them; violation of the statutory litigation procedures and may affect the fair judgment; the composition of the trial organization does not comply with the regulations or the members who should be recused according to law have not been recused. Among them, the first five categories belong to the situations where a retrial should be conducted.

Q3: What is the time limit for applying for a rehearing?

Generally, it is within six months after the judgment or ruling takes legal effect. If no application is submitted within six months, the people's court will not accept the party's application for retrial. It should be noted that the starting point is the date when the judgment takes effect, not the date of service, so the effective date should be confirmed in time. If there are statutory grounds for deduction or extension, the party needs to provide evidence to explain them in time.

Q4: How will the new evidence be evaluated?

Two conditions must be met simultaneously: first, it must be objectively impossible to obtain the evidence in the original trial process; second, the evidence must be sufficient to overturn the findings of the original judgment. For example, the appraisal conclusions that occurred after the original trial and the evidence disclosed by the other party after the trial may constitute new evidence; while the evidence submitted in the original trial that was not accepted by the court is generally not recognized as new evidence. Therefore, it is necessary to explain the specific reasons for the limited availability of the evidence.

Q5: Will applying for a retrial affect the enforcement of the original judgment?

Under normal circumstances, it will not have any impact. Applying for a retrial will not affect the effectiveness and enforcement of the original judgment or ruling, except for the case where the party who files a lawsuit in accordance with the law applies for a retrial and the court rules to suspend the enforcement. Therefore, if the other party may transfer property during the retrial, it is recommended to apply for property preservation in the original proceedings or separately to ensure the enforcement effect. For specific preservation arrangements, please refer to the relevant provisions.Creditor's rights and debts, and enforcementColumn.

The above questions and answers are mainly based on the judicial practice in the Beijing area. There may be differences in the adjudication opinions in different regions. It is recommended to consult a professional lawyer based on the specific circumstances of the case.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the necessary evidence to avoid missing the statutory time limits.Specialised services Legal services·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and open adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.