The Supreme People’s Court (SPC) issued or participated in issuing close to two dozen groups of typical cases from the beginning of November to the end of December, 2025.

These typical cases reflect the latest policies promoted by the SPC and  President Zhang Jun (张军)’s preference for conveying judicial policy through typical cases.   Conveying policy through typical cases is also consistent with the guidance of General Secretary Xi Jinping, who has stressed that “one case is better than a dozen documents (习近平总书记强调， “一个案例胜过一打文件”).  Each group represents an accomplishment for the division, bureau, or office that reviewed and edited (compiled) the cases and, in some cases, negotiated with other institutions to select cases that meet the needs of multiple institutions.   This post highlights some of the trends visible in these latest typical cases, but first provides a Chinese case law system refresher.

Quick Chinese case law system refresher

Typical cases are part of the SPC’s dynamic case guidance system. I am including a brief overview of the dynamic Chinese case law system to clarify the role of typical cases, as these two recent articles suggest confusion among journalists, and some of my own students have difficulty understanding the system.   I use the term “dynamic” because the elements of the case guidance system have changed under SPC President Zhang Jun 张军. My sense is that SPC judges in different substantive areas place different emphasis on case guidance as tools in their guidance toolbox, but that is a discussion for a different day and forum.

1. The most persuasive type of cases in the case guidance system are guiding cases (指导性案例),  which have been approved by the SPC judicial (adjudication) committee.  Former Judge Guo Feng  described guiding cases here as “of  [an] authoritative, normative, exemplary, and uniformly applicable nature. They are de facto binding. The compilation of GCs has specific standards and standardized procedures and needs to meet requirements for high quality….Where a case being adjudicated is, in terms of the basic facts and application of law, similar to a Guiding Case released by the Supreme People’s Court, the court should refer to the “Main Points of the Adjudication” of the relevant Guiding Case in its ruling or judgment.” Judge Guo provides an authoritative explanation of the meaning of “refers to” and related issues in the same article linked above.  This earlier blogpost summarizes the 2020 SPC guidance on similar case search.
2. The second most authoritative type of case is the reference case (参考案例).   As I wrote here, “reference cases” are a new type of edited case published in the People’s Court Case Database（人民法院案例库), which launched in early 2024.  The principal drafters of the People’s Court Case Database Work Procedures clarified in an authoritative article that “reference cases”  are “a new type of edited case created by the Case Database system. Their effectiveness is higher than other cases except for guiding cases.”  As of 23 December 2025, the  People’s Court Case Database contains 5216 reference cases.  My earlier post explains the selection process.
3. Another type of guidance, which some SPC media describe as part of the case database system, is the Court Answers Platform, also translated as the “Judicial Q & A Platform,” which I analyzed in the earlier post.  The official intent, as evidenced in this article in SPC media, is for the People’s Court Database and the Court Answers Platform to be an integrated guidance product. This goal was mentioned in the SPC’s report to the NPC, as well as the latest court reform plan (about which I have a short article on its way to publication).
4. The type of case guidance with the longest history is the typical (典型 model/exemplary/example) case. Typical cases too, are edited cases and are therefore “compiled.” The SPC Gazette started publishing typical cases in 1985, but I have earlier typical cases in other SPC publications in my research archives.
   As I wrote here, the SPC’s Gazette cases are generally considered to be the most authoritative of the typical cases, but there is no authoritative guidance on the definition or hierarchy of typical cases.  I have more details on typical cases in that article. Typical cases are considered to guide the lower courts as a form of case guidance and policy signaling.  Therefore, Chinese lawyers and in-house counsel also pay attention to typical cases. Typical cases are also used as a form of public legal education (普法, see here and here).
5.  I am not further discussing the authoritativeness of judgments or rulings, but see my earlier discussion.

The rules derived from these cases are not static.  Provisions from typical cases may be incorporated into meeting minutes (conference summaries 会议纪要), for example,  while on 30 December 2025, the SPC issued a judicial interpretation that drew on questions raised on the Court Answers Platform. It is not unusual for provisions from guiding cases or judicial interpretations to be incorporated into legislation.

Overview of Recent Typical Cases

What the SPC has issued in the last two months of 2025 are typical cases (典型案例). The SPC issued several groups of typical cases with the Supreme People’s Procuratorate (SPP), which serve to harmonize views on specific issues between the two institutions and sometimes with multiple institutions.  The SPC issued several with regulatory/administrative institutions, reflecting a policy trend of recent years. President Zhang Jun highlighted this policy in his 2024 specialized report to the NPC Standing Committee on administrative litigation (I have a draft article that touches on this policy trend).  This year’s year-end typical cases include several groups with the Women’s Federation and one group with the All-China Federation of Trade Unions.

Some groups of cases promote mediation (phrased as promoting the Fengqiao Experience 枫桥经验). (For those with the time to read academic articles, a recent article by Professor Benjamin Liebman and Liu Zeming has an extended discussion of this.

Some typical cases of note:

1. A group of domestic violence cases 最高法发布2025年中国反家暴典型案例.  Jeremy Daum’s (Yale Law School’s Paul Tsai China Center/Chinalawtranslate.com) analysis of those cases is found here. He said “the release shows a generally positive direction, and was interesting in that the cases were presented as showing compliance with international legal norms.”

2.  Fourth Group of  Civil Cases That Embody Socialist Core Values 最高人民法院发布5起第四批人民法院大力弘扬社会主义核心价值观典型民事案例  These cases appear to be aimed at educating the general public and providing some guidance for less experienced judges on how socialist core values can be applied. Among the cases are: two cases involving employers: a workplace sexual harassment case and an employer that withdrew a job offer after the candidate accepted it and had provided evidence of terminating his previous job; a slip and fall case brought by someone who focused on his phone rather than his step.  The SPC issuing a typical case conveying that workplace sexual harassment is a violation of socialist core values is particularly significant.

For those with a greater interest in socialist core values and court judgments, I wrote a quick summary of the related SPC guiding opinion here and commented that “it can be seen as a part of the ‘socialist core valueization’ of Chinese law and the legal system, and in particular, the judiciary. It is one important piece of how the judiciary is being further transformed in the Xi Jinping era.” A 2024 student note by Liu Zeming in the Columbia Journal of Transnational Law argues that through the project of integrating socialist core values into judgments,  the Party-state is effectively imposing a new conception of what Chinese law is.

3. Typical cases of application of model texts (third batch) (最高法发布示范文本应用典型案例（第三批）). These cases provide examples to the lower courts and public of how courts are using model texts (court forms), a project involving cooperation between the SPC,  Ministry of Justice, and All China Lawyers Association.  Bilingual versions of those forms are behind lawinfoChina.com’s paywall and Chinese versions are available in many places, such as here.    That link leads to a downloadable 900+ page document with the accompanying multi-institutional document and the court forms. The typical cases promote the use of those court forms. An experienced senior judge whom I contacted commented that “these forms are useful for some types of cases, such as traffic accident cases.”

4.  The SPC issued several groups of typical cases with the SPP. The two institutions issued a third group of administrative public interest cases 两高”联合发布第三批行政公益诉讼典型案例 .  The SPC contributed to the drafting of the procuratorate-led public interest litigation law.  Many of the cases involved a local procuracy providing a procuratorial suggestion to an administrative agency to enforce a provision of the law and filing suit when the suggestion was not taken seriously. One of the cases involved a county human resources bureau that did not properly supervise listings on a bureau-sponsored job platform, several of which restricted jobs to men only.  Another group of SPC and SPP typical cases involves corruption cases related to ordinary people (最高人民法院 最高人民检察院联合发布依法惩治群众身边腐败犯罪典型案例).  The cases involve embezzlement, fraud, and misappropriation of funds related to school meals, elderly and disabled person services, medical insurance, etc.  Another group focuses on job-related crimes in the financial sector (最高人民法院、最高人民检察院联合发布依法惩治金融领域职务犯罪典型案例), with cases of corrupt financial regulators and bankers.  The case descriptions provide insights into the many ways corruption can be performed. The fourth group relates to the courts and procuratorate joining forces to substantively resolve administrative disputes, also a policy promoted in recent years.   法检合力法治化实质性化解行政争议典型案例.

4. Typical cases with regulators include: cases with the National Financial Regulatory Administration promoting diversified dispute resolution (particularly mediation) 国家金融监督管理总局; typical cases with the National 最高人民法院联合发布金融领域纠纷多元化解典型案例 and the State Administration of Cultural Heritage 最高人民法院、国家文物局联合发布依法推进文物保护典型案例

5. The SPC issued typical cases with the Women’s Federation as well as with the Women’s Association plus other institutions.  All of these cases relate to women, children, and families. One group of typical cases with the Women’s Federation involving judicial assistance to minors (最高法、全国妇联联合发布保护未成年人权益司法救助典型案例).  The two institutions have jointly issued typical cases several years in a row, previously in time to coincide with Children’s Day. This year, two of the cases involved providing psychological services to the affected minors,  and all involved courts providing financial and other arrangements for minors who lost one or both parents.  It provides a glimpse into the difficulties faced by orphans, particularly in rural areas. The SPC, SPP, Women’s Federation, and Ministry of Justice issued the top 10 cases protecting women’s and children’s rights   Another group of typical cases with the Women’s Federation and Ministry of Justice promotes mediation in family disputes (最高人民法院与全国妇联、司法部联合发布婚姻家庭纠纷调解工作典型案例

6. The SPC issued two groups of typical cases promoting the protection of private enterprise, including one group on private enterprise property rights and retrial cases involving the protection of the rights of private entrepreneurs 最高法发布涉民营企业产权和民营企业家权益保护再审典型案例. Almost 10 years ago, I wrote about a document conveying many of the same points as these typical cases.  Unfortunately, it appears that protecting the rights of private entrepreneurs is an “evergreen” issue for the Chinese courts.

7.  Several groups of typical cases involve labor issues: one involving the evergreen issue of wage arrears of migrant workers (最高人民法院发布人民法院治理欠薪典型执行案例); another issued with the SPP and the All-China Federation of Trade Unions  on using “one letter and two documents”  to protect workers rights (最高法会同全国总工会、最高检联合发布 2025年劳动法律监督“一函两书”典型案例).

  Concluding comment

The primary purpose of these typical cases appears to vary, but all signal “people-centered.”  For the person with patience to wade through the initial political framing, they provide slivers of insight into current judicial policy,  and persistent issues in society, the operation of the judicial system.

The SPC also intends these typical cases to evidence that the SPC is implementing the Opinions of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on Strengthening Trial Work in the New Era  中共中央关于加强新时代审判工作的意见, the 2025 Party document guiding the work of the courts, which President Zhang Jun has described as “the major political task for the courts at present and the foreseeable future.”

______________________________________

Many thanks to Yuan Ye, PKU doctoral student, for his comments on this post.  This year, I will continue to focus on writing longer articles and trust that some of the articles stuck in the pipeline will see the light of day.  One hope I have for my own work is that I am able to spend some time inside the SPC, although I am doubtful that it will ever be possible in my lifetime.