Network Judicial auction should seek innovation in legal framework

July 10 night, Zhejiang senior http://www.aliyun.com/zixun/aggregation/31896.html "> People's Court and Taobao opened the" Judicial auction platform to complete the "first shot", Ningbo two district Court as the seller stationed and complete the auction of two cars. July 11, China's Auction Industry association issued a statement said, "network of judicial auction" does not conform to the current auction related laws and regulations, once pushed away will have a great impact on the normal order of the auction market.

The Chinese Auction Industry association makes this assertion is not groundless. According to the "Auction Law" and "the Supreme People's Court on the Commission evaluation, auction work," a number of rights to engage in network judicial auction can only be approved by the competent department of auction industry approved the establishment, and the Chinese Auction Industry Association authorized a certain qualification level of the auction company. In addition, the Auction Act also stipulates that the auction should be presided over by the auctioneer. Therefore, Taobao's judicial auction platform in the qualification and procedures are problems.

In this respect, Taobao publicly responded that its role as a third-party trading platform, only to provide technical services, the Court since the end of its own auction is the main body, the legality of the auction subject is beyond doubt. Therefore, the crux of the problem is Taobao positioning is what?

If Taobao is an auction institution, it is necessary to have an auction qualification and the auctioneer to host the auction, otherwise it is illegal. According to the statement of Taobao and its official website, by the Taobao set up and explain the auction rules, receive security, provide customer service and so on, and indicated that the Court department "commissioned the court." Therefore, it is obvious that Taobao is only a trading platform, providing technical services rather than engaging in auction activities.

If Taobao is only a trading platform, only to provide technical services rather than engage in auction activities, the court belongs to the auction, Taobao "judicial auction Q&a" also made the corresponding provisions. In this case, there is a legal opinion, the auction law of the second provision: this Law applies to the People's Republic of China auction enterprises in the auction activities, and the court is not auction enterprises, therefore not applicable to the auction law. However, the Supreme People's Court's provisions on the auction and sale of property in the civil execution of the People's Court clearly stipulates that the people's Court shall entrust an auction institution with corresponding qualification to the auction house for the sale of the property of the executed person and supervise the auction. Therefore, the court can not auction itself, can only entrust the auction. If the court is the subject of the auction, the above judicial interpretation is obviously violated.

Therefore, in the above "Judicial auction platform" Cooperation, either Taobao illegal, or the court illegal, the two need to have one.

Objectively speaking, Zhejiang High People's Court and Taobao cooperation is also a judicial auction of an innovation, indeed has a lot of positive significance. The advantages of online auctions are clear, compared to traditional auctions, online auctions are more open and transparent, helping to reduce black-boxes. In addition, due to the absence of geographical constraints, the participation rate of online auctions is generally higher, which helps to raise auction prices and better safeguard the interests of creditors.

However, the above "judicial auction platform" has also brought a series of problems due to the conflict with the current law. First, what is the dignity of the law? In particular, the law is more damaging when the judiciary engages in illegal acts. Secondly, the current auction management system has been broken, auction market access system and what is the significance of it? Is it not a system vase? How will the auction industry regulate and prevent the emergence of an industry disorder? Finally, if the above "Judicial auction platform" is lawful, any website that does not have an auction qualification can cooperate with any court for judicial auction as long as it has the business license and the Telecommunication Business license. In this way, more and more similar cooperation will be created to breed more judicial corruption in the form of "innovation". Moreover, compared to Taobao, such sites often do not have much visibility, the participation of a few bidders, the final auction successful price is lower, or even the final streaming, which greatly impaired the interests of creditors. Therefore, the judicial auction should seek innovation within the legal framework.