legal-article-retrieval

name

legal-article-retrieval

description

Generate standardized legal research reports for case retrieval, statutory research, similar-case analysis, and related legal research scenarios. Use when the user needs industry or professional analysis, prediction of adjudication outcomes, verification of the validity of legal authorities, confirmation of legal bases for claims or defenses, or analysis of judicial practice tendencies. Supports litigation strategy assessment, trial preparation, compliance review, legal training, and other legal practice scenarios.

Chinese source (authoritative): ../../skills/legal-article-retrieval/SKILL.md

Overall Retrieval Process Map

Preparation Stage → Thinking Stage → Execution Stage → Review Stage → Deliverable Stage
    ↓                    ↓                ↓               ↓                ↓
Clarify purpose    Hierarchy of     Systematic      Cross-validation   Report presentation
Tool configuration   sources         retrieval      Subsumption test    Conclusion formation
                   Legal relations   Keyword method Retrieval loop      Risk warnings
                   Claim-based       Case reverse-
                     thinking          lookup
                   Validity screening
                   Conflict handling

Stage 1: Retrieval Preparation and Information Confirmation

1.1 Defining the Retrieval Purpose

Law is abstract. Statutory text may present unclear major-premise semantics or indeterminate word meaning and scope. In practice, parties often dispute the specific meaning of a provision. Therefore, before citing a legal rule, counsel should not only understand the provision’s literal meaning and logical structure, but also consider its application requirements and consult authoritative interpretations by relevant bodies.

Typical retrieval scenarios:

1. Determining the legal basis for litigation claims
2. Reviewing the law applied by the opposing party
3. Rechecking the law applied in an adjudication

[Case Study] Highway and Residential Area Distance Case Retrieval purpose: Ascertain restrictive rules on how far a highway under construction must be kept from residential areas

1.2 Prerequisite Information Confirmation (Mandatory Process)

Before entering legal retrieval, confirm that all of the following information has been obtained:

Information Category	Content That Must Be Confirmed
Dispute type	Labor dispute / contract dispute / tort liability / marriage & family / administrative, etc.
Party information	You (worker / consumer / plaintiff, etc.) vs. the other party (employer / seller / defendant, etc.)
Core facts	What happened? Time, place, conduct
Issues in dispute	What do you want? (compensation / rights protection / liability determination, etc.)
Geographic information	If local rules may apply, the province/city must be known
Legal relationship	The legal relationship between the user and the other party (e.g., employment contract / sales contract)

Questioning template:

Please supplement the following information so I can accurately retrieve legal authorities:

1. [Dispute type] What kind of legal issue are you facing?
   - Labor dispute (overtime pay, resignation, work injury, etc.)
   - Contract dispute (sale, lease, loan, etc.)
   - Tort liability (traffic accident, personal injury, etc.)
   - Marriage & family (divorce, inheritance, property, etc.)
   - Other (please specify)

2. [Party information] What is your status?
   - Worker / consumer / citizen / enterprise, etc.

3. [Core facts] Briefly describe what happened (time, course of events, relief sought)

4. [Geography] Does a specific locality apply? (e.g., Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, or other places with special rules)

5. [Legal relationship] Have you and the other party signed a contract? (e.g., employment contract / service contract)

[Strictly Prohibited]

• Do not call any legal retrieval tool before the user has confirmed the facts
• Do not perform inferential legal analysis based on assumptions
• Do not include legal conclusions in the fact summary

Process requirements:

1. Output a “Fact Summary” covering: parties (you vs. the other party), timeline (what happened), conduct (specific acts), issues in dispute (what you want), geography (localities involved)
2. Explicitly ask for confirmation: “Are the above facts accurate? Please state any supplements or corrections.”
3. Enter the legal retrieval stage only after the user confirms

[Case Study] Highway and Residential Area Distance Case

• Parties: Highway construction entity vs. owners of adjacent residential properties
• Core facts: Highway construction is too close to the residential area; owners claim their rights and interests are harmed
• Issue in dispute: Whether law clearly restricts the distance between a highway and residential areas
• Geography: Consider national laws and local rules (e.g., Guangdong Province Highway Regulations)

---

Stage 2: Retrieval Tool Configuration and Database Selection

Classified by types of sources of law:

Type	Sources	Effect	Application Requirements
Formal sources	Constitution, statutes (laws), administrative regulations, local regulations, departmental rules, international treaties	Have expressly provided legal effect; must be considered	May be used directly as adjudicative authority
Informal sources	Custom, policy, Guiding Cases, legal theory, moral principles	Lack express legal force, but have legal persuasive force; may be considered	Assist application of formal sources or fill gaps

2.1 Baseline Databases (Primary Legal Resources)

Definition: Normative legal resources, mainly laws, administrative regulations, legal interpretations, and similar instruments enacted by state legislative bodies and government. In common-law jurisdictions these also include judicial precedents and decisions. Such resources have legal effect and are normative.

Characteristics:

1. Mandatory and normative
2. Different levels of hierarchical effect
3. Legal documents have temporal validity
4. Large volume of legal literature
5. Accessed and used through particular methods

Commonly used baseline databases:

• PKULaw (北大法宝) (including English version)
• Lawyee (北大法意)
• Angle Knowledge Base (月旦知识库)
• Westlaw China (万律网)
• WestlawNext
• Lexis Advance
• HeinOnline
• Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law
• Kluwer Law Online
• Beck-online (German)
• China Judgments Online (中国裁判文书网)

[Case Study] Highway and Residential Area Distance Case Retrieval tools: PKULaw (北大法宝), China Judgments Online

2.2 Auxiliary Databases (Secondary Legal Resources)

Definition: Non-normative legal resources—all literature and information that interprets, researches, discusses, or comments on law, such as law review articles, monographs, textbooks, and explanations or commentaries on statutes and cases. Such resources do not have legal force.

Characteristics:

• Multiple publication types, large volume, widely used
• Retrieved by literature type (books, journals, theses, etc.)
• Includes self-media, WeChat official accounts, and other new-media resources

Types of auxiliary resources:

• Secondary materials: Textbooks, practice guides, monographs, WeChat official accounts, Wolters Kluwer China professional commentary, firm work product, government websites, case analyses, academic articles, online discussion, legislative developments, etc.
• Global search: Search engines (Google, Baidu, Sogou WeChat) to retrieve articles for background
• AI assistance: AI for fuzzy retrieval and preliminary analysis, but results may be used only after verification against baseline databases

Important note: Titles of laws and regulations, category, issuing authority, issuance date, effective date, and validity status are of particular importance.

2.3 Proprietary Databases

• The user’s local databases
• The law firm’s accumulated case-handling experience

---

Stage 3: Retrieval Thinking and Methodological Framework

3.1 Hierarchy-of-Sources Retrieval

Retrieval order: Constitution → statutes (laws) → administrative regulations → local regulations → departmental rules → judicial interpretations

Contemporary Chinese system of sources of law:

Rank	Enacting Body	Characteristics	Examples
Constitution	National People’s Congress (NPC)	Fundamental law; supreme effect	Constitution of the People’s Republic of China
Statutes (laws)	NPC and its Standing Committee	Effect second only to the Constitution	Civil Code; Labor Law
Administrative regulations	State Council	Effect below statutes	Regulations on the Implementation of the Labor Contract Law
Local regulations	People’s congresses and standing committees of provinces / cities divided into districts	Apply within the administrative region	Guangdong Province Highway Regulations
Departmental rules	Ministries and commissions under the State Council	Specific fields of administrative management	Interim Provisions on Wage Payment
Judicial interpretations	Supreme People’s Court (SPC) / Supreme People’s Procuratorate (SPP)	Have legal effect	Fa Shi 〔2020〕 No. 17

Hierarchy-of-effect rules (as provided in the Legislation Law):

• The Constitution has the highest legal effect
• Statutes have higher effect than administrative regulations, local regulations, and rules
• Administrative regulations have higher effect than local regulations and rules
• Local regulations have higher effect than local government rules at the same level and below
• Rules of provincial/autonomous-region governments have higher effect than rules of governments of cities divided into districts and autonomous prefectures within that administrative region

Application rules:

• Normative documents enacted by the same body: where a special provision conflicts with a general provision, apply the special provision; where a new provision conflicts with an old provision, apply the new provision
• Conflict adjudication procedures: conflicts between statutes are decided by the NPC Standing Committee; conflicts between administrative regulations by the State Council; conflicts between departmental rules and local government rules by the State Council

Operational points:

• Record invalid retrieval paths (to understand legislative gaps)
• Excerpt effective provisions and keep the original text intact
• Identify the relationship between jurisdiction and the rank of the issuing body
• Flag documents from bodies without authority (e.g., internal meeting minutes cannot be used directly as adjudicative authority)

[Case Study] Highway and Residential Area Distance Case Hierarchy-of-sources retrieval process:

• Invalid retrieval (record the path): Road Traffic Safety Law; Regulations on the Implementation of the Road Traffic Safety Law; Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Measures for Completion (Handover) Acceptance of Highway Engineering Projects (no specific distance rules)
• Valid retrieval:
  • Statutes: General Principles of the Civil Law Art. 83 (neighboring relations), Art. 106 (tort liability); Property Law Art. 91 (safety of immovable property)
  • Administrative regulations: Regulations on Highway Safety Protection Art. 11 (highway building control zone of no less than 30 meters), Arts. 13 and 28
  • Local regulations: Guangdong Province Highway Regulations Arts. 5 and 9 (highway and building clusters no less than 200 meters)
  • Other normative documents: Technical Standard of Highway Engineering Art. 3.0.1

3.2 Legal-Relationship Thinking

Core logic: Examine legal relationships in the chronological order in which case facts arose; treat legal relationships as the focus of examination; determination of legal facts and legal relationships precedes the search for norms.

Logical Dimension	Updated Content
Temporal logic	Refined into the full life cycle of legal relationship: formation → validity → performance → change
Subject logic	Subject types; capacity for rights / capacity for acts; distinction between absolute and relative legal relationships; structure of rights and obligations (dominion rights / claim rights / defenses / formative rights)
System logic	General Provisions–Specific Provisions–Exceptions structure; clarify the application order “specific provisions before general provisions”; examine principle–exception–proviso layers

Retrieval process

Step	Description	Logical Dimension
1. Determine the legal relationship	Labor / contract / tort / neighboring relations	Subject logic
2. Determine the type of right	Dominion / claim / defense / formative right	Content logic
3. Determine the governing law	Special provisions → specific-part provisions → general-part provisions	System logic
4. Break down constitutive elements	Subject, object, content, liability	Structural logic
5. Compare elements item by item	Fact subsumption	Temporal logic
6. Examine defenses and exceptions	Grounds that defeat liability	Exception logic
7. Hierarchical retrieval	Higher rank → lower rank	Hierarchy logic
8. Case verification	Guiding Cases	Practice logic

• Retrieval content

Knowledge of Civil Legal Relationships	Reflection in Retrieval Thinking
General Provisions subject system	Subject-qualification review (capacity for rights, capacity for acts)
Distinction between absolute and relative rights	Different retrieval paths for absolute vs. relative legal relationships
Classification of rights (dominion / claim / defense / formative)	Methods for breaking down constitutive elements by right type
Legislative technique combining general and specific parts	Retrieval order “specific provisions before general provisions”
Principles and exceptions	Priority examination of proviso clauses
Correspondence of rights and obligations	Bidirectional retrieval: one party’s right → the other party’s obligation

[Case Study] Highway and Residential Area Distance Case Characterization of the legal relationship: Neighboring-relations dispute + tort-liability dispute

• Subject qualification: Highway construction entity (holder of rights in immovable property) vs. neighboring residents (holders of rights in adjacent immovable property)
• Rights and obligations: The construction entity must not endanger the safety of adjacent immovable property; residents enjoy neighboring-rights protection
• Applicable law: Neighboring-relations rules in the General Principles of the Civil Law; Property Law Art. 91; Tort Liability Law

1. Application relationship between General Provisions and Specific Provisions

Application Layer	Retrieval Order	Functional Role	Application in the Highway Case
Special provisions	Retrieve first	Specialized rules	Regulations on Highway Safety Protection Art. 11 (30 meters)
Specific-part provisions	Retrieve next	General rules	Civil Code, Book on Real Rights, Chapter 7 (neighboring relations)
General-part provisions	Supplementary retrieval	Catch-all application	Civil Code Art. 8 (public order and good morals)

Principle–exception structure analysis

30-meter rule (mandatory norm; floor)
    └── 200-meter rule (planning norm; ceiling)
            └── Proviso: “determined according to requirements such as safe sight distance”

System-logic conclusion:

• <30 meters: Directly unlawful
• 30–200 meters: Need further examination of whether safety is “endangered”
• ≥200 meters: Conforms to planning; generally not a tort
  Structure of rights and obligations content

Rights system
├── Dominion rights (real rights, personality rights) → absolute rights → erga omnes
├── Claim rights (obligatory rights) → relative rights → inter partes
├── Defenses (against claim rights)
└── Formative rights (unilaterally change a legal relationship)

Obligations system
├── Duties to act (affirmative conduct)
└── Duties to forbear (non-infringement)

3.3 Claim-Based Thinking Retrieval

Core logic: Start from the claim basis; examine whether the plaintiff’s litigation claims can be established; the search for norms precedes determination of legal facts.

1. Retrieval order

1. Whether the claim has already arisen
2. Whether the claim has not been extinguished
3. Whether the claim may be exercised

Tier 1: Contractual claims (priority of private autonomy)
    └── Detailed reasons table for priority over negotiorum gestio, real rights, tort, and unjust enrichment
    
Tier 2: Claims from unilateral juristic acts (bequests, reward advertisements)

Tier 3: Quasi-contractual claims (culpa in contrahendo, unauthorized agency)
    └── Priority reason: related to contracting; good-faith duties higher than in ordinary relations

Tier 4: Claims under status law (maintenance, child support, parental support)

Tier 5: Negotiorum gestio claims (lawful justification)
    └── Justifying character + alignment with Core Socialist Values (avoid the adverse effects of the “Peng Yu case”)

Tier 6: Real-rights claims (priority of real-rights protection)
    └── Three reasons for priority over obligatory rights (priority of effect, no limitation period, no fault required)
    └── Four-type table (return of the original thing, elimination of obstruction, elimination of danger, restoration to original condition)

Tier 7: Possession-protection claims (protection of factual status)
    └── Four types + 1-year preclusive period (除斥期间)

Tier 8: Unjust enrichment claims (correction of benefit shifts)
    └── Reason for priority over tort (fault not required)

Tier 9: Tort claims (catch-all protection)
    └── Four types (general, presumed fault, no-fault, joint)
    └── Reason for placing last (not a premise for other claims)

2. Concurrence and choice of claims (highway case)

Claim Basis	Application Conditions	Advantages	Disadvantages	Recommendation
Real-rights claim (Art. 236)	Obstruction or possible obstruction of a real right	No fault required; limitation periods do not apply	Does not support damages	Assert first
Tort claim (Art. 1165)	Fault-based tort	Supports damages	Must prove fault	Assert in parallel

Litigation strategy:

• Assert real-rights claim + tort claim together (aggregation of claims)
• First seek elimination of obstruction and elimination of danger
• Concurrently seek damages

3. Three-layer structure for examining claims

Has the claim arisen?
    ├── Tatbestand (符合构成要件 / fits the constitutive elements)
    ├── Unlawfulness (whether justifying grounds exist)
    └── Culpability (whether fault exists)
        ↓
Has the claim not been extinguished?
    ├── Performance, deposit, set-off, release, merger
    ├── Expiry of the limitation period
    └── Right-holder’s waiver
        ↓
May the claim be exercised?
    ├── Do defenses exist?
    └── Are there other obstacles to exercise?

4. Supplementary doctrinal explanations

Block	Content
Legislative purpose	Contract (private autonomy); real rights (protect dominion status); tort (make good loss); unjust enrichment (correct imbalance)
Scholarly views	Medicus (economy of thought); Wang Zejian (claim basis as cornerstone of civil-law thinking); Wang Liming (legal methodology); Zhu Qingyu (validity system of juristic acts)
Methods of interpretation	Textual, systematic, purposive, historical, comparative

5. Case: Nine-tier examination table for the highway case

Order	Claim Type	Examination Conclusion	Reason
1	Contractual claim	❌ Not established	No contractual relationship
2	Unilateral act	❌ Not established	No bequest or reward advertisement
3	Quasi-contract	❌ Not established	No culpa in contrahendo
4	Status law	❌ Not established	Not a status relationship
5	Negotiorum gestio	❌ Not established	Construction entity managing its own affairs
6	Real-rights claim	✅ Established	May seek elimination of obstruction and elimination of danger
7	Possession protection	△ May be established	But real-rights claim is preferable
8	Unjust enrichment	❌ Not established	Has legal basis (approvals)
9	Tort claim	✅ Established	May seek damages

3.4 Screening the Validity of Statutory Provisions

Operational process

Step	Review Content	Checking Method
Step 1: Formal review	Authenticity / accuracy	Cross-verify in two or more authoritative databases
Step 2: Substantive review	Validity (repealed, amended, pending effectiveness)	Query validity status; judge the nature of the document
Step 3: Applicability review	Subject-matter effect (personal + spatial)	Judge party status, geographic scope, nature of conduct
Step 4: Temporal review	Temporal effect (effectiveness, termination, retroactivity). Substantive law does not apply retroactively; substantive judicial interpretations have practical retroactive effect; procedural law applies immediately	Build a case timeline; note first-/second-/retrial application scope
Step 5: Hierarchical review	Level of effect	Check enacting body; judge conflict; resolve conflicts

Theoretical framework of legal effect

Type of Effect	Core Question	Integration Points
Personal effect	To whom does the law apply?	Point 3: subject-matter effect (personality / territoriality / protective / hybrid principles)
Spatial effect	Where does the law apply?	Point 3: subject-matter effect (central legislation / local legislation; extraterritorial effect)
Temporal effect	When does the law apply?	Point 4: temporal effect (effectiveness, termination, retroactivity)
Level of effect	Hierarchical relations among norms	Point 5: level of effect (higher-level law > lower-level law)

3.4.1 Personal Effect: Four Principles

Knowledge Point	Application Scenario	Operational Steps	Judgment Standard	Common Errors	Case Example
Personality principle	Chinese citizens engaging in legal acts abroad	5 steps: confirm nationality → confirm place of act → retrieve Chinese law → retrieve lex loci actus → compare conflict rules	Criminal Law Art. 7	Mistakenly thinking “acts abroad are not subject to Chinese law”	Chinese citizen investing in and building a highway abroad
Territoriality principle	Foreigners engaging in legal acts within China	4 steps: confirm place of act → confirm “within the territory” extensions → retrieve Chinese law → judge exceptions	Civil Code Art. 12	Ignoring “territorial extensions” such as embassies/consulates and vessels	Foreign construction entity building a highway within China
Protective principle	Acts abroad harming Chinese national or citizen interests	5 steps: confirm act abroad → confirm harm → retrieve jurisdictional rules → judge “minimum sentence” → retrieve lex loci actus	Criminal Law Art. 8	Ignoring the “minimum sentence of three years or more” limit	Foreigner building a road abroad causing death or injury to Chinese citizens
Hybrid principle	Ordinary foreign-related civil cases	5 steps: judge territoriality → personality → protection → retrieve treaties → retrieve conflict rules	Generally adopted in China	Applying only one principle	Comprehensive judgment of a foreign-related highway contract dispute

Operational flowchart:

Does the case involve foreign-related elements?
    ├── Yes → Judge the type of connecting factor
    │           ├── Act/result within Chinese territory? → Territoriality first
    │           ├── Is one party a Chinese citizen? → Personality as supplement
    │           └── Harm to major Chinese national or citizen interests? → Protection as supplement
    └── No → Apply territoriality directly

3.4.2 Spatial Effect of Law: Concrete Application of Levels and Scope

Knowledge Point	Application Scenario	Operational Steps	Judgment Standard	Common Errors	Case Example
Levels of spatial effect	Determine retrieval scope (nationwide or local)	5 steps: confirm case locality → confirm enacting body → retrieve central legislation → retrieve local legislation → judge conflict	Legislation Law Art. 81	Citing local regulations across regions	Retrieve Guangdong rules; do not retrieve Shanghai rules
Extraterritorial effect	Cross-border investment; overseas acts affecting China	5 steps: confirm act abroad → confirm domestic impact → retrieve extraterritorial application rules → retrieve treaties → judge conditions	Criminal Law Art. 6(3)	Ignoring the “effects principle”	Overseas road construction pollution affecting China
Territorial extension	Cases on embassies/consulates, vessels, aircraft	4 steps: confirm place → confirm “territorial extension” → retrieve legal rules → judge jurisdiction	Criminal Law Art. 6(2)	Ignoring territorial-extension rules	Construction-contract dispute on a Chinese-flagged vessel
Autonomy regulations and separate regulations	Cases in ethnic autonomous areas	5 steps: confirm autonomous locality → retrieve regulations → confirm adaptations → confirm authority → confirm approval documents	Legislation Law Art. 90	Failing to verify whether adaptations were approved	Autonomous prefecture adaptation of highway construction compensation standards
Special economic zone (SEZ) regulations	Cases within SEZs	5 steps: confirm within SEZ → retrieve SEZ regulations → confirm authorization → confirm adaptations → adjudicate if needed	Legislation Law Art. 95(2)	Failing to verify the authorizing decision	Shenzhen SEZ adaptations for highway management

Hierarchical retrieval flowchart:

Determine where the case arose
    ↓
Layer 1: Retrieve central legislation (nationwide effect)
    ├── Constitution → statutes → administrative regulations → departmental rules
    ↓
Layer 2: Retrieve local legislation (effect within the administrative region)
    ├── Provincial local regulations → local regulations of cities divided into districts → provincial government rules → municipal government rules of cities divided into districts
    ↓
Layer 3: Retrieve special-region legislation (may adapt)
    ├── Autonomy regulations, separate regulations → SEZ regulations
    ↓
Layer 4: Judge conflicts and application

3.4.3 Temporal Effect of Law: Effectiveness, Termination, Retroactivity

Knowledge Point	Application Scenario	Operational Steps	Judgment Standard	Common Errors	Case Example
Three forms of effective time	Determine whether a law has taken effect	4 steps: retrieve implementation date → judge form of effectiveness → build timeline → compare time of act	Legislation Law Art. 57	Confusing “publication date” with “implementation date”	Civil Code implemented 1 Jan 2021
Express repeal	Confirm whether old law was expressly repealed	4 steps: retrieve repeal clause → retrieve repeal notice → check database labels → confirm temporal scope of repeal	Civil Code Art. 1260	Citing repealed law	Marriage Law and Inheritance Law expressly repealed
Implied repeal	Confirm whether old law was impliedly repealed	4 steps: compare old and new law → judge conflict → confirm old-law application after new law takes effect → retrieve judicial application	Legislation Law Art. 92	Ignoring implied repeal	General Principles of the Civil Law impliedly repealed
Non-retroactivity of law	Application of new law to prior acts	5 steps: confirm time of act → confirm law’s effective time → judge sequence → generally apply old law → retrieve special rules	Legislation Law Art. 93	Applying new law wholesale to prior acts	Civil Code does not apply to acts before 2021
Favorable-retroactivity exception	Criminal law: old law with lighter penalty if favorable	4 steps: compare impact of old and new law → judge favorability → retrieve judicial interpretations → judge permissibility	Criminal Law Art. 12	Wrongly applying in civil law	Criminal field: apply new law when it punishes more lightly
Procedural “new law” principle	Procedural law changes during litigation	5 steps: confirm procedural stage → confirm procedural-law change → judge whether “ongoing” → retrieve application rules → judge application	Legislation Law Art. 93 proviso	Confusing substance and procedure	Second-instance procedure applies new Civil Procedure Law
Substantive “old law” principle	Law applicable to substantive rights and obligations

Temporal-effect operational flowchart:

Build a case timeline
    ↓
Determine time of legal act vs. time law took effect
    ↓
Compare and judge
    ├── Act before law took effect → generally apply old law (non-retroactivity)
    │                               ├── Criminal law: retrieve “old law with lighter penalty if favorable”
    │                               ├── Civil law: favorable retroactivity generally not allowed
    │                               └── Procedural law: apply new law (procedure from the new)
    └── Act after law took effect → apply new law
            ↓
Judge whether the law has been repealed (express / implied)
            ↓
Judge whether it is a time-spanning act → generally apply new law (from-the-new principle)

3.4.4 Level of Effect and Conflict Resolution

Knowledge Point	Application Scenario	Operational Steps	Judgment Standard	Common Errors	Case Example
Higher-level law prevails over lower-level law	Conflict across ranks	5 steps: determine enacting body → judge effect level → compare provisions → judge conflict → preferentially apply higher-level law	Legislation Law Arts. 87–89	Wrongly applying lower-level law	Municipal rule 20 m conflicts with administrative regulation 30 m; apply 30 m
Special law prevails over general law	Conflict at the same rank	5 steps: confirm same body → compare scope → judge special vs. general → same matter → special prevails	Legislation Law Art. 92	Wrongly identifying “same body”	Regulations on Highway Safety Protection prevail over Highway Law
New law prevails over old law	Conflict at the same rank	4 steps: confirm same body → compare implementation dates → judge new vs. old → new prevails (only for acts after new law takes effect)	Legislation Law Art. 92	Applying to prior acts	2021 revised Guangdong Province Highway Regulations prevail
New general law vs. old special law	Cross conflict at the same rank	4 steps: confirm same body → judge new general vs. old special → if uncertain → request enacting body to decide	Legislation Law Art. 94	Unilaterally choosing which to apply	Statutes decided by NPC Standing Committee
Local regulations vs. departmental rules	Cross conflict across ranks	4 steps: confirm conflicting parties → State Council gives opinion → apply local regulations or request NPC Standing Committee decision	Legislation Law Art. 95(1)(2)	Directly applying departmental rules	Not involved in this case
Departmental rules vs. local government rules	Conflict at the same rank	3 steps: confirm conflicting parties → equal effect → State Council decides	Legislation Law Art. 95(1)(3)	Unilaterally choosing which to apply	Not involved in this case
Autonomy / separate regulation adaptations	Cases in ethnic autonomous areas	6 steps: confirm autonomous locality → retrieve regulations → confirm adaptations → confirm authority → confirm approval → preferential application

Conflict-resolution decision flowchart:

Discover conflict between provisions
    ↓
Judge whether enacted by the same body
    ├── Yes (same rank) → Judge conflict type
    │                       ├── Special vs. general → apply special law
    │                       ├── New vs. old → apply new law (only for acts after new law takes effect)
    │                       └── New general vs. old special → request enacting body to decide
    └── No (different ranks) → Judge level of effect
                            ├── Lower conflicts with higher → apply higher-level law
                            ├── Local regulations vs. departmental rules → State Council opinion → decision
                            ├── Departmental rules vs. local government rules → State Council decides
                            ├── Autonomy / separate regulation adaptations → preferential within authority
                            └── SEZ regulation adaptations → preferential within the SEZ

General principles for resolving legal conflicts

Rank Relationship	Principle	Content
Different ranks	Higher-level law prevails over lower-level law	Constitution > statutes > administrative regulations > local regulations > rules
Same rank	Special law prevails over general law	On the same matter, special provisions prevail
Same rank	New law prevails over old law	On the same matter, new provisions prevail

Special situations in resolving legal conflicts

Conflict Situation	Resolution Rule	Decision Body
New general law vs. old special law	Decided by the enacting body	Statutes: NPC Standing Committee; administrative regulations: State Council
Local regulations vs. departmental rules	Three steps (State Council opinion → apply local regulations / request NPC Standing Committee decision)	State Council, NPC Standing Committee
Departmental rules vs. local government rules	Decided by the State Council	State Council
Autonomy / separate regulations vs. higher-level law	Adapted provisions prevail (within adaptation authority)	—
SEZ regulations vs. higher-level law	Authorized legislation; decided by NPC Standing Committee	NPC Standing Committee

When conflict cannot be resolved: Refer to the purpose of the norms and existing precedents; use dialectical reasoning (substantive reasoning) to resolve hard problems caused by the complexity of legal provisions.

Situations for dialectical reasoning:

• Certain legal provisions clearly lag behind social development
• Provisions at the same rank conflict with each other
• Hard problems arise from the complexity of legal provisions
• Two legal propositions serving as premises of legal reasoning contradict each other Special conflict-resolution situations:

Highway case: hierarchy-of-effect conflict check:

Conflict Situation	Analysis	Conclusion
Regulations on Highway Safety Protection (30 m) vs. Guangdong Province Highway Regulations (200 m)	Not a true conflict: 30 m is a prohibitory floor (building control zone); 200 m is a planning ceiling (planning spacing); different application scenarios	Apply in parallel: 30 m as minimum standard; 200 m as aspirational/planning standard
Civil Code Art. 295 vs. General Principles of the Civil Law Art. 83	New law prevails over old law: Civil Code has repealed the General Principles of the Civil Law	Cases after 2021 apply the Civil Code

Validity-check table (highway case)

Provision	Authenticity	Validity	Subject-Matter Effect	Temporal Effect	Level of Effect	Overall Judgment
Civil Code Art. 295	✓	✓ Currently in force	✓ Applies to neighboring relations of immovable property	✓ Applies after 2021	Statute (second tier)	Citable
General Principles of the Civil Law Art. 83	✓	✗ Repealed	—	Applies before 2021	Statute (repealed)	Citable for pre-2021 cases
Regulations on Highway Safety Protection Art. 11	✓	✓ Currently in force	✓ Applies to highway building control zones	✓ Applies after 2011	Administrative regulation (third tier)	Citable
Guangdong Province Highway Regulations Art. 5	✓	✓ Currently in force	✓ Applies within Guangdong Province	✓ Applies after 2021	Local regulation (fourth tier)	Citable within Guangdong
Shanghai Municipality Highway Regulations	✓	✓ Currently in force	✗ Geographic mismatch (Shanghai)	—	Local regulation	Not citable
Meeting minutes of a municipal transport bureau	✗	✗ Internal document	✗ Cannot serve as adjudicative authority	—	Non-legal document	Not citable

---

Stage 4: Retrieval Execution Methods and Techniques

4.0 Data-Source and Tool-Call Convention (Mandatory)

Core principle: Every statutory provision cited under this skill must come from real retrieval. Fabricating article numbers or content from memory is strictly forbidden.

Before executing the retrieval methods below, first determine whether a regulation-retrieval tool exists in the runtime environment (e.g., a connected regulation-library MCP service, retrieval API, or local regulation library):

1. If it exists: The designed search queries must be submitted to that tool; its returned real results (law name, document number, effect level, effective/expiry dates, provision text, source link) are the sole data source for subsequent subsumption, citation, and reporting. Do not substitute or supplement retrieval results with “provisions” from memory.
2. If it does not exist: Complete search-query design and methodological steps as usual, but mark every place involving a concrete provision as [待查] (to be verified), and state in the report that “no regulation library is connected; the following queries must be executed manually.” Never fabricate article numbers, content, or document numbers.
3. Tool-agnostic: This convention depends only on the abstract capability “input search terms → return real statutory text,” and is not tied to any particular vendor. For concrete integration methods (e.g., PKULaw MCP), see README.md in this skill’s directory.

4.1 Systematic Retrieval Method (Top-Down)

Core idea: Provisions at higher levels of the legal hierarchy are usually highly general, while more detailed rules often appear in related judicial interpretations. When understanding a judicial-interpretation provision, consult the “Understanding and Application” materials organized by the Supreme People’s Court for that interpretation, or the press release and press conference Q&A issued by the SPC or its relevant departments when the interpretation was released.

Operational steps:

1. Start from the legal system / structure of provisions: First review the principled rules of the basic law (e.g., before looking up Marriage Law judicial interpretations, first look at the Marriage Law itself)
2. Use automatic indexing: Professional databases automatically index under each provision other laws, judicial interpretations, judgments, etc., that cite it
3. From general law to special law: e.g., for real-estate research, first Property Law, then departmental laws such as Land Administration Law

Sources that may serve as adjudicative authority:

• NPC legislation, administrative regulations, judicial interpretations, local regulations
• Guiding Cases of the SPC and SPP (quasi-sources of law)

Tips for identifying judicial interpretations:

• Post-1997 judicial interpretations must carry a “Fa Shi” document number
• Pre-1997 judicial interpretations are determined by convention
• Critical distinction: “Ta” (他) series replies are only case-specific replies, not judicial interpretations; “Fa Shi” approvals are judicial interpretations
• Verification sources: Gazette of the Supreme People’s Court and Collection of Judicial Interpretations of the Supreme People’s Court (1949–2013)

References for understanding provisions:

• NPC legislation: consult NPC Legislative Affairs Commission statutory commentaries and corresponding SPC “understanding and application” books
• SPC judicial interpretations: consult corresponding SPC “understanding and application” books for those interpretations

Principle–specific-part approach: Use a general-to-special retrieval path

[Case Study] Highway and Residential Area Distance Case Systematic retrieval process:

1. General-law retrieval: From General Principles of the Civil Law Art. 83 (general neighboring-relations rule) → Property Law Art. 91 (safety of immovable property)
2. Special-law retrieval: Highway Law → Regulations on Highway Safety Protection (specialized administrative regulation)
3. Local-rule retrieval: Guangdong Province Highway Regulations (local special rule: 200-meter spacing)
4. Technical-norm retrieval: Technical Standard of Highway Engineering (industry standard)
5. Discovery of related provisions: Art. 11 of the Regulations on Highway Safety Protection and Art. 5 of the Guangdong Province Highway Regulations differ (30 m vs. 200 m); conflict analysis is required

4.2 Keyword Retrieval Method (Precise Targeting)

Three-step method:

1. Reverse from purpose: Derive keywords from the retrieval purpose
2. Add/remove keywords (delete noise): Process core keywords
3. Keyword association: After establishing core keywords, radiate related dimensions

Methods for discovering keywords:

1. Start from Chinese text: Synonyms, near-synonyms, antonyms (e.g., “spouse” instead of “wife/husband/hubby/wifey”)
2. Derive from legal doctrine: Unauthorized disposition → bona fide acquisition; unauthorized agency → apparent agency
3. Discover from wording of related provisions
4. Discover from the prose of judgments
5. Start from industry customary terms
6. Extract overlapping characters/words: e.g., “contract invalid,” “contract valid,” “contract loses effect” → extract “contract effect”
7. Search logic symbols: space (AND), - (exclude), or (OR)

Expansion techniques:

• Base keywords (core elements)
• Expanded keywords (synonyms / higher-order terms)
• Exclusion keywords (reduce noise)

Adjusting retrieval aperture:

• Narrow aperture: Lengthen keywords (agency → unauthorized agency); add more keywords (disposition → disposition*invalid); add more retrieval fields (limit issuing body to SPC)
• Widen aperture: Use fewer words; use wildcards; add synonyms joined by OR

Principles for setting keywords:

1. Fuzzy first, then precise
2. Procedure first, then substance
3. Time first, then focus

Building search queries:

• Search query = retrieval path + search term + operators + search term
• Classification search, subject search, author search, title search, number search

Logical operators (Boolean operators):

• Logical AND (AND/*): Narrow scope; raise precision
• Logical OR (OR/+): Widen scope; raise recall
• Logical NOT (NOT/-): Exclude specific terms

Wildcards (truncation symbols):

• • (asterisk): Stands for one or more characters
• ? (question mark): Stands for one character

[Case Study] Highway and Residential Area Distance Case Keyword retrieval process:

• Round 1: “highway, meters” (too broad)
• Round 2: “highway, construction” (still broad)
• Round 3: “highway, land acquisition / expropriation / requisition / demolition” (expand synonyms)
• Optimization strategy: Discover related terms such as “building control zone,” “safety distance,” “spacing”
• Geographic association: Add “Guangdong Province,” “Highway Regulations” to limit local rules

4.3 Case Reverse-Lookup Method (Backward Derivation)

Applicable scenarios: Unfamiliar fields, or when statutory provisions cannot be precisely located

Theoretical basis: The major premise of a case usually cycles repeatedly between facts and law, between the individual case and similar cases, and between general and special situations. Individual cases do not arise according to the design scenarios of legal provisions; for constitutive elements, one must not only understand, interpret, and inwardly confirm them, but also “trim” the elements needed as premises of inference.

Operational process:

1. Retrieve cases with “case fact” keywords (subject, conduct, result)
2. Locate the structure of the judgment:
   • “Having ascertained through trial” (facts)
   • “This Court holds” (reasoning)
   • “In sum, pursuant to” (statutory provisions)
3. Reverse-derive applicable provisions; extract issues and rules

Retrieval-loop mechanism: Where no more applicable norm exists, and for objective reasons relevant materials are truly lacking so the matter cannot be resolved from the fact side, further retrieve other materials (e.g., targeted cases, legal theory) to interpret norms or fill gaps, while managing risk.

[Case Study] Highway and Residential Area Distance Case Discoveries from case reverse-lookup:

• Retrieve similar neighboring-relations disputes via China Judgments Online
• Claim bases found in similar-case judgments:
  • Cases ⑧ and ⑩ cite General Principles of the Civil Law Art. 106 (fault-based tort liability)
  • Case ⑨ cites General Principles of the Civil Law Art. 117 (property damage compensation) + Tort Liability Law Art. 85
• Damages calculation rule: Use house value as the base; discretionary reduction for plaintiff’s fault or natural depreciation

---

Stage 5: Retrieval Review and Quality Evaluation System

5.1 Retrieval Quality Evaluation Indicators

5.1.1 Core Indicator Definitions

Indicator	Formula	Meaning in Legal Retrieval	Quality-Control Target
Recall	Relevant documents retrieved / total relevant documents in the collection × 100%	Were important statutes or cases missed?	≥85% (no critical norms omitted)
Precision	Relevant documents retrieved / total documents retrieved × 100%	How accurate are the results? How much noise?	≥70% (most results usable directly)

5.2 Retrieval Review Mechanisms

Layer 1: Recall Assurance—Cross-Validation (Prevent Omissions)

Necessity: A single retrieval may produce biased conclusions; multi-dimensional verification is needed to ensure recall

Validation 1: Comparison across databases (core recall assurance)

Operational process:

Step	Operation	Recall Assessment	If Below Target
1	Run the same query in PKULaw and China Judgments Online separately	Compare differences in result counts	If difference >20%, analyze causes
2	Identify exclusive documents	Check whether critical cases were missed	Supplement retrieval in the missing database
3	Cross-compare results	Calculate overlap rate	If overlap <50%, expand retrieval

[Case Study] Highway and Residential Area Distance Case

Initial search (PKULaw):

• Keywords: “highway neighboring relations”
• Results: 15 cases
• Recall assessment: Found Regulations on Highway Safety Protection Art. 11 ✓

Cross-validation (China Judgments Online):

• Same keywords
• Results: 22 cases (7 more)
• Difference analysis: Among the extra cases, 2 are critical similar cases (on compensation standards for building control zones)
• Recall problem: Initial search missed important similar cases; recall insufficient
• Remedial measures: Supplement exclusive China Judgments Online cases; expand keywords with “building control zone”

Validation 2: Validation by different methods

Method combinations:

Method Combination	Role for Recall	Validation Standard
Systematic retrieval + keyword retrieval	Systematic retrieval completes the legal system; keyword retrieval targets precisely	Overlap of results from the two methods should be >60%
Statutory retrieval + case reverse-lookup	Statutory retrieval ensures normative coverage; case reverse-lookup discovers practice rules	Provisions found by reverse-lookup should already be covered in systematic retrieval
Higher-level-law retrieval + lower-level-law retrieval	Higher-level law sets the framework; lower-level law supplies detail	Quantity of lower-level law should match ordinary proportions (e.g., local regulations ≥3)

[Case Study] Highway and Residential Area Distance Case

Systematic retrieval results:

• Found General Principles of the Civil Law Art. 83 (neighboring relations), Property Law Art. 91 (safety of immovable property)
• Recall assessment: Civil-law norms fully covered ✓

Keyword retrieval validation:

• Keywords: “highway distance compensation”
• Found Regulations on Highway Safety Protection Art. 13 (compensation rules)
• Recall assessment: Administrative regulations fully covered ✓

Case reverse-lookup validation:

• Through similar cases, found Guangdong Province Highway Regulations Art. 5 (200-meter spacing)
• Recall assessment: Local rules previously omitted; recall insufficient ✗
• Remedial measures: Add geographic limiters; retrieve similar rules in other provinces

Validation 3: Timeliness review

Review content:

Check Item	Significance for Recall	Operational Standard
Were the latest amendments retrieved?	Avoid missing new law	Check new rules within 3 months before the retrieval date
Were repealed old laws retrieved?	Understand historical evolution	Old law may contain critical interpretations or transitional clauses
Were soon-to-be-effective rules retrieved?	Anticipate legal change	Watch regulations “published but not yet implemented”

---

Layer 2: Precision Optimization—Subsumption Test (Prevent Misuse)

Core task: After the retrieval report is formed, “subsume” it into the practice case to test the precision of results (whether they accurately apply to this case).

Six Elements of the Subsumption Test (Item-by-Item Precision Assessment)

Difference Factor	Precision Assessment Question	Effect on Precision	Optimization Measures
1. Differences in legal facts	Are retrieved case facts substantially similar to this case?	Large factual difference → precision ↓	Adjust keywords; add fact limiters
2. Differences in legal application	Do retrieved provisions apply to this case’s legal relationship?	Wrong application → precision ↓	Re-characterize the legal relationship
3. High/low effect hierarchy	Do results contain conflicts between higher- and lower-level law?	Unresolved conflict → precision ↓	Choose applicable norms per conflict rules
4. Evolution of norms and adjudication	Do retrieved cases reflect the latest judicial tendency?	Outdated cases → precision ↓	Limit retrieval time to the last 3–5 years
5. Geographic differences	Do retrieved rules apply to this case’s locality?	Geographic mismatch → precision ↓	Add or exclude geographic limiters
6. Quantity	Is the quantity of results appropriate? (Too many or too few both hurt precision)	Quantity imbalance → precision ↓	Adjust retrieval aperture

[Case Study] Highway and Residential Area Distance Case

Subsumption test process:

Test Element	Initial Result	Precision Assessment	Problem Found	After Optimization
Legal facts	Retrieved “highway construction” cases	△	Mostly “land-acquisition compensation,” not “neighboring relations”	Add “neighboring relations” limiter; precision ↑
Legal application	Regulations on Highway Safety Protection Art. 11	✓	Correct application	Keep
Effect hierarchy	Found 30 m vs. 200 m conflict	✗	Conflict unresolved; precision ↓	Analyze different application scenarios; precision ↑
Evolutionary status	Retrieved 2010 cases	△	Some cases outdated	Limit to last 5 years; precision ↑
Geographic difference	Guangdong Province Highway Regulations	✓	Geography matches	Keep
Quantity	Initial search 200 items	✗	Too many; hard to screen	Optimized to 15; precision ↑

Example Precision Calculation After Subsumption Testing

[Precision Comparison Before and After Subsumption Testing]

Initial results (200 items):
- Actually relevant (directly usable in the report): 60
- Actually irrelevant (to be excluded): 140
- Initial precision = 60/200 = 30% (too low; needs optimization)

After subsumption-test optimization (15 items):
- Actually relevant (directly usable in the report): 12
- Actually irrelevant (to be excluded): 3
- Optimized precision = 12/15 = 80% (meets target)

Precision-improvement strategies:
- Exclude repealed provisions (General Principles of the Civil Law-related clauses)
- Exclude irrelevant causes of action (ordinary traffic accidents)
- Exclude geographically mismatched rules (other provinces differing too much from Guangdong)
- Exclude outdated cases (compensation standards from 5+ years ago have changed)

---

Layer 3: Quality Balance—Second-Retrieval Decision

Trigger condition: When recall and precision cannot both meet targets, start a second retrieval

Second-retrieval decision matrix

Recall Status	Precision Status	Decision	Focus of Second Retrieval
Insufficient (<85%)	Good (≥70%)	Expand retrieval	Guided by “subsumption” purpose; supplement omitted norms
Good (≥85%)	Insufficient (<70%)	Narrow retrieval	Optimize keywords; exclude noise; raise precision
Insufficient (<85%)	Insufficient (<70%)	Re-retrieve	Fully adjust strategy; check database selection
Good (≥85%)	Good (≥70%)	Proceed to report	Retrieval complete; form final report

Three principles of second retrieval

1. Make up for deficiencies of the first retrieval

   • Insufficient recall: Add databases, expand keywords, widen time range
   • Insufficient precision: Add limiters, use logical NOT, screen by authority

2. Oriented to the purpose of “subsumption”

   • All second-retrieval improvements must center on “whether it applies to this case”
   • Avoid seeking recall for its own sake and introducing many norms that cannot be subsumed

3. Follow the general retrieval process

   • Second retrieval is not simple repetition, but a complete “retrieve → cross-compare → report” process
   • Record differences between the two retrievals; explain the optimization process in the report

[Case Study] Highway and Residential Area Distance Case—Complete Second-Retrieval Process

First-retrieval assessment:

• Recall: 75% (missed Guangdong Province Highway Regulations Art. 5’s 200-meter rule)
• Precision: 40% (many traffic-accident cases mixed in)
• Decision: Both recall and precision insufficient; second retrieval needed

Second-retrieval optimization:

Optimization Dimension	First Retrieval	Second Retrieval	Improvement Effect
Databases	PKULaw only	Add China Judgments Online, local government websites	Found local regulations; recall ↑
Keywords	“highway neighboring relations”	“highway building control zone Guangdong Province”	Precise targeting; precision ↑
Time range	All time	Last 10 years	Fewer outdated cases; precision ↑
Geographic limits	None	Add “Guangdong Province”	Match this case’s locality; precision ↑
Cause-of-action screening	None	Limit to “neighboring-relations disputes”	Exclude traffic accidents; precision ↑

Second-retrieval assessment:

• Recall: 95% (covers core norms and local rules)
• Precision: 80% (most results usable directly)
• Decision: Targets met; proceed to report drafting

---

5.4 Common Quality Problems and Countermeasures

Quality Problem	Appearance	Root-Cause Analysis	Countermeasures
Insufficient recall	Critical statutes/cases missing	Single database, keywords too narrow, time range too small	Multi-database cross-check, synonym expansion, widen time range
Insufficient precision	Hard to screen; too much noise	Keywords too broad, no cause/geography limits, old law not excluded	Add limiters, logical NOT exclusion, authority screening
Recall–precision imbalance	Full but imprecise, or precise but incomplete	Retrieval strategy lacks iteration; no layered optimization	Use a “funnel model”: full first, then precise; gradually narrow
Subsumption failure	Results cannot apply to this case	No difference-factor analysis; mechanical copying	Strictly compare the 6 elements item by item; second retrieval if needed

---

Stage 6: Presenting Retrieval Results and Drafting the Report

6.1 Legal Analysis Structural Framework

Analysis order (do not skip steps; do not merge):

1. Characterize the legal relationship
2. Break down constitutive elements
3. Compare elements item by item
4. Allocate the burden of proof
5. Analyze possible defenses
6. Assess conclusion probability

6.1.1 Characterization of the Legal Relationship

Must clearly state:

Element	Description
Type of legal relationship	Labor / contract / tort / neighboring relations, etc.
Subject qualification	Whether both parties have statutory subject qualification
Content of rights and obligations	Rights each party enjoys and obligations each bears
Applicable law	Which statutes, administrative regulations, and judicial interpretations apply

6.1.2 Explanation of Technical Terms

[Mandatory] The report must include a “Technical Terms Explained” section:

Term	Legal Definition / Explanation	Legal Basis
De facto employment relationship	Employer and worker have not concluded a written employment contract, but the worker provides labor to and is managed by the employer	Labor Contract Law Art. 7; Notice on Matters Concerning Establishing Employment Relationships, Lao She Bu Fa 〔2005〕 No. 12, Art. 1
Economic compensation (N)	One-time compensation paid by the employer after lawfully terminating the employment contract, based on the worker’s years of service	Labor Contract Law Art. 47
Damages (2N)	Double economic compensation paid when the employer unlawfully dissolves or terminates the employment contract	Labor Contract Law Art. 87
Triple wages	Statutory-holiday overtime pay = normal working-day wage × 3	Labor Law Art. 44
Payment in lieu of notice	Employer dissolves the contract after 30 days’ prior written notice at one month’s wages, or pays an extra month’s wages	Labor Contract Law Art. 40
Building control zone	Area within a certain range on both sides of a highway where construction of buildings and surface structures is prohibited to ensure highway operational safety	Regulations on Highway Safety Protection Art. 11

6.2 Norms for Citing Statutory Provisions

[Mandatory] Every legal authority must include the following elements:

Element	Description	Example
Document name	Full name of the law or regulation	Labor Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China
Document number	Enacting body and document number	Presidential Order No. 65
Effective time	When it took effect / was amended	Implemented from 1 January 2008
Article number	Specific article(s)	Articles 44 and 45
Verbatim citation	[Article topic] + statutory text	[Calculation of economic compensation] Economic compensation shall be paid to the worker at the rate of one month’s wages for each full year of service with the employer…
Validity status	In force / repealed / amended	In force

Annotation of citation relationships among provisions:

→ Citation relationship: Labor Contract Law Art. 87 → Labor Contract Law Art. 47 (economic compensation calculation standard)
→ Citation relationship: Lao She Bu Fa 〔2005〕 No. 12 Art. 1 → Labor Law Art. 16
→ Citation relationship: Regulations on Highway Safety Protection Art. 11 → Highway Law (higher-level authorizing law)

6.3 Labeling Hierarchy of Legal Norms

Level	Effect	Examples
Statutes (laws)	Enacted by the NPC and its Standing Committee; highest effect among ordinary norms	Labor Law; Labor Contract Law; Civil Code
Administrative regulations	Enacted by the State Council; effect below statutes	Regulations on the Implementation of the Labor Contract Law; Regulations on Highway Safety Protection
Judicial interpretations	Enacted by the SPC and SPP; have legal effect	Fa Shi 〔2020〕 No. 17
Departmental rules	Enacted by State Council ministries and commissions	Interim Provisions on Wage Payment
Local regulations	Enacted by provincial people’s congresses	Shanghai Municipality Labor Contract Regulations; Guangdong Province Highway Regulations
Guiding Cases	Issued by the SPC; have referential effect	Guiding Case No. 72
Typical cases	Issued by the SPC; for reference only	SPC typical cases

[Important Distinctions]

• Judicial interpretations: Have legal effect; courts at all levels must apply them
• Guiding Cases: Have referential effect (to be referred to and followed), but are not adjudicative authority
• Typical cases: For research reference only; no legal binding force

6.4 Organizing Limitation Periods and Deadlines

If limitation issues are involved, organize them separately:

Matter	Period	Basis	Notes
Civil litigation limitation	3 years (general)	Civil Code Art. 188	Runs from when the right-holder knew or should have known that rights were harmed and who the obligor is
Special litigation limitations	1 / 2 / 4 years, etc.	Civil Code Arts. 189–194	Carriage of goods by sea contracts, international sale of goods contracts, etc.
Preclusive period (除斥期间)	Per specific rules	Various special laws	Nature: formative right; right extinguished upon expiry
Administrative reconsideration period	60 days	Administrative Reconsideration Law Art. 20	Runs from knowledge of the specific administrative act
Administrative litigation period	6 months / 15 days	Administrative Litigation Law Art. 46	15 days if dissatisfied with reconsideration decision; 6 months if suing directly
Labor arbitration limitation	1 year	Labor Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Law Art. 27	Not limited while the employment relationship continues

6.5 Controlling the Strength of Conclusion Language

Conclusions must mark judgment strength:

• High probability of being established
• Substantial controversy exists
• Insufficient evidence to judge

Do not use absolute expressions (e.g., “certain to win,” “definitely unlawful”).

6.6 Standard Structure of the Retrieval Report

Normative legal-document retrieval results should be ordered as follows:

1. List document name, effective date, and clauses related to the case’s issues
2. List valid, relevant legal rules
3. Note the databases used and keywords entered
4. When submitting electronically, hyperlink the names of laws and regulations

Required report sections:

1. Statement of the Problem

• Clearly state the problem this retrieval addresses
• Facilitates judging whether the overall direction is wrong or biased

2. Course of Retrieval

• Note databases used
• Record keywords entered
• Describe the retrieval path

3. Listing of Norms (by Effect Hierarchy)

• Statutes (laws)
• Administrative regulations
• Local regulations
• Departmental rules
• Judicial interpretations
• Other normative documents

4. Retrieval Analysis

• Remain neutral and objective
• Group by relevance and strength
• Highlight conflicting authorities and explain reasons
• Elaborate separately at three levels: legislation (whether rules exist / reasons for gaps), enforcement (administrative application), and adjudication (judicial tendency / geographic differences / temporal evolution)
• Charts may be used to show adjudicative tendencies

5. Retrieval Conclusion

• Directly answer the retrieval purpose
• Clarify the current state of the law
• Summarize judicial practice tendencies
• Point out legal-application risk points (positive consequences + negative consequences)
• Seek opposing views or arguments; avoid accepting a single view
• Be wary of practice articles with brand-promotion aims; absorb critically

---

Complete Sample Retrieval Report

Legal Retrieval Report (Sample)

Main Text

Retrieval purpose: Ascertain restrictive rules on how far a highway under construction must be kept from residential areas

Retrieval tools: PKULaw (北大法宝), China Judgments Online

Retrieval keywords: highway, meters; highway, construction; highway, land acquisition / expropriation / requisition / demolition

Retrieved regulations and other documents:

4-1 Invalid retrieval (record the path):

• Road Traffic Safety Law of the People’s Republic of China (no specific distance rules)
• Regulations on the Implementation of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the People’s Republic of China (no specific distance rules)
• Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Measures for Completion (Handover) Acceptance of Highway Engineering Projects (no specific distance rules)

4-2 Valid retrieval:

4-2-1 Statutes (laws)

Document Name	Document Number	Effective Time	Article Number	Verbatim Citation	Validity Status
General Principles of the Civil Law of the PRC	Presidential Order No. 37	1 Jan 1987	Article 83	[Neighboring relations] Adjacent parties to immovable property shall correctly handle neighboring relations concerning water diversion and drainage, passage, ventilation, lighting, and the like in the spirit of benefiting production, facilitating life, solidarity and mutual assistance, and fairness and reasonableness. Where obstruction or loss is caused to the adjacent party, infringement shall cease, obstruction shall be eliminated, and loss shall be compensated.	Repealed (superseded by the Civil Code)
General Principles of the Civil Law of the PRC	Presidential Order No. 37	1 Jan 1987	Article 106, paragraph 2	[Fault liability] Citizens and legal persons who, through fault, infringe state or collective property, or another’s property or person, shall bear civil liability.	Repealed
General Principles of the Civil Law of the PRC	Presidential Order No. 37	1 Jan 1987	Article 117, paragraph 2	[Property damage compensation] One who damages another’s property shall restore it to its original condition or compensate at a discounted price.	Repealed
Property Law of the PRC	Presidential Order No. 62	1 Oct 2007	Article 91	[Safety of immovable property] A holder of rights in immovable property who excavates land, constructs buildings, lays pipelines, or installs equipment, etc., must not endanger the safety of adjacent immovable property.	Repealed (superseded by Civil Code Art. 296)
Tort Liability Law of the PRC	Presidential Order No. 21	1 Jul 2010	Article 85	[Liability for falling objects from buildings] Where buildings, structures, or other facilities, or objects placed or hung thereon, fall or drop and cause harm to another, and the owner, manager, or user cannot prove absence of fault, they shall bear tort liability.

→ Citation relationship: Civil Code Art. 296 → former Property Law Art. 91 (succession relationship) → Citation relationship: Civil Code Art. 1253 → former Tort Liability Law Art. 85 (succession relationship)

4-2-2 Administrative regulations

Document Name	Document Number	Effective Time	Article Number	Verbatim Citation	Validity Status
Regulations on Highway Safety Protection	State Council Order No. 593	1 Jul 2011	Article 11	[Scope of building control zones] Local people’s governments at or above the county level shall, according to principles of ensuring highway operational safety and economizing land use and the needs of highway development, organize transport, land and resources, and other departments to demarcate the scope of highway building control zones. Distances outward from the outer edge of highway land use are: (1) national highways not less than 20 meters; (2) provincial highways not less than 15 meters; (3) county highways not less than 10 meters; (4) township highways not less than 5 meters. For expressways, the building control zone shall extend not less than 30 meters outward from the outer edge of highway land use.	In force
Regulations on Highway Safety Protection	State Council Order No. 593	1 Jul 2011	Article 13	[Construction restrictions within control zones] Within highway building control zones, except as needed for highway protection, construction of buildings and surface structures is prohibited; those lawfully built before demarcation may not be expanded; if demolition is required for highway construction or to ensure operational safety, compensation shall be given according to law.	In force
Regulations on Highway Safety Protection	State Council Order No. 593	1 Jul 2011	Article 28	[Permit for road-related construction] The construction entity applying for road-related construction shall submit to the highway management authority: (1) design and construction plans meeting relevant technical standards and norms; (2) a technical assessment report ensuring the quality and safety of the highway and ancillary facilities; (3) an emergency plan for construction hazards and accidents.	In force
Guangdong Province Highway Regulations	Announcement of the Guangdong Province People’s Congress Standing Committee	2003	Article 5

→ Conflict note: Art. 11 of the Regulations on Highway Safety Protection (expressway 30 m) differs from Art. 5 of the Guangdong Province Highway Regulations (expressway 200 m); the former is a “building control zone” (new construction prohibited), the latter is “planning spacing” (planning control)

4-2-3 Other normative documents

Document Name	Issuing Body	Article Number	Verbatim Citation	Validity Status
Technical Standard of Highway Engineering	Ministry of Transport	Art. 3.0.1	[Route design requirements] Trunk highways should avoid passing through towns. Route design should occupy less farmland, demolish fewer houses, convenience the public, and not damage important historical relics.	Industry standard

Retrieval analysis:

6-1 Legal analysis of retrieval

On the legal analysis, perhaps due to legislative lag or legislative orientation, there is no specific statutory restriction on how much distance must be kept when a highway under construction passes near residential areas. Yet safety is mutual: rules on 30-meter highway control zones, safety technical assessment reports, environmental impact assessments, and the like all regulate the safety of highway construction. Still, these rules are hard for judges to use as a basis for finding that building a highway too close is unlawful.

Counsel’s conjecture as to why courts support plaintiffs’ claims is mainly that judges inwardly regard demolition and resettlement compensation as a necessary cost of highway construction, and secondarily that judges emphasize safety. The claim basis in such judgments is General Principles of the Civil Law Art. 106 in cases ⑧ and ⑩; case ⑨ cites General Principles of the Civil Law Art. 117 and Tort Liability Law Art. 85. On damages calculation, courts use house value as the base and discretionary reduce for plaintiff’s fault or natural depreciation of house value.

6-2 Norm conflict analysis

Norm A	Norm B	Conflict Point	Resolution
Regulations on Highway Safety Protection Art. 11 (30 m)	Guangdong Province Highway Regulations Art. 5 (200 m)	Differing distance standards	Different application scenarios: 30 m is the building control zone (new construction prohibited); 200 m is planning spacing (planning control)

Retrieval conclusion:

Chinese law has no concrete, clear restrictive rule on the distance between a highway under construction and adjacent residential areas. (Conclusion strength: high probability of being established)

Legal-application risk warnings:

• Positive consequences: Damages may be claimed on neighboring-relations grounds; courts may support compensation requests
• Negative consequences: Hard to find the construction entity directly “unlawful”; difficult to seek stoppage of construction or demolition

8. Retrieval time spent: xx hours

9. Completion date: 4 January 2016

Appendix—Retrieval Quality

I. Recall assurance measures

1. Cross-database validation: Dual-database retrieval with PKULaw and China Judgments Online; overlap rate 65%; supplemented 3 exclusive cases
2. Cross-method validation: Systematic retrieval covered 3 levels—statutes, administrative regulations, local regulations; keyword retrieval underwent 3 rounds of expansion (“highway” → “building control zone” → “neighboring relations”)
3. Timeliness review: Retrieval cutoff April 2026, including latest Civil Code-related amendments

Self-assessed recall: 95% (no critical norms omitted, including core authorities such as Regulations on Highway Safety Protection Art. 11 and Guangdong Province Highway Regulations Art. 5)

Precision optimization measures

1. Authority-ranked screening:
   • Kept: 1 Guiding Case, 2 SPC Gazette cases, 5 high-court typical cases
   • Excluded: 12 intermediate/basic-court cases (reference only), 8 cases related to repealed provisions
2. Subsumption test: Compared the 6 difference factors item by item; excluded 23 inapplicable norms
3. Geographic matching: Limited to Guangdong Province and nationwide rules; excluded 15 local rules of other provinces

Self-assessed precision: 80% (of the final 15 norms, 12 are directly usable for legal analysis)

Retrieval process iteration log

Round	Keywords	Result Count	Recall	Precision	Main Problems	Optimization Measures
Round 1	highway neighboring relations	200	75%	30%	Missed local regulations; too much noise	Add databases; optimize keywords
Round 2	highway building control zone Guangdong Province	42	90%	65%	Still some outdated cases	Limit time range
Round 3	highway building control zone Guangdong Province last 10 years	15	95%	80%	Targets met	Proceed to report stage

Quality conclusion Through three rounds of iteration, this retrieval reached good levels on both recall and precision; the results can support a legal analysis report.