| Traditionally, China has relied heavily on administrative regulation systems to correct misconducts in economic and social life. However, the efficiency of this system is not satisfactory, and the failure of administrative regulation has led to many public accidents that incur a lot of public criticism. The introduction and development of punitive damages in China is largely a response to this failure of administrative regulation. Compared with administrative regulation, punitive damages can stimulate private participation in public regulation through the mobilization of private litigation. While invigorating the entire regulatory system, punitive damages can also bring about excessive and inefficient litigation, and lead to the exploitation of the irrationality, inconsistency and ambiguity in the legal system. In this regard, a necessary institutional condition for the extensive application of punitive damages is to develop a more professional and dynamic judicial system, which can develop and improve the skills and capabilities for regulating private actions. Meanwhile, due to the already existence of complicated administrative regulation, the introduction of punitive damages requires subtle design to ensure that punitive damages are coordinated with the functions of the administrative regulation system. Especially, we should make sure that punitive damages complement, but not overlap with, the corresponding administrative penalties. Finally, like punitive damages, the expansion of the lawsuit requesting the administration to perform duties also expands the role of private individuals in public regulation. China should pay attention to this new situation and ensure that equal importance is attached to both of the two institutions in the process of institutional evolution. |
京公网安备11010102006664号 京ICP备2023015853号