Menu

HomeAll Real CasesLoan & Debt DisputesProperty & Real EstateContract & BusinessConsumer & Daily
HomeAll Real CasesCourt Grants Plaintiff Voluntary Withdrawal in Rental Dispute Case Involving 500 Yuan in Court Fees

Court Grants Plaintiff Voluntary Withdrawal in Rental Dispute Case Involving 500 Yuan in Court Fees

All Real CasesMay 21, 2026 4 min read

Court Grants Plaintiff Voluntary Withdrawal in Rental Dispute Case Involving 500 Yuan in Court Fees

CASE OVERVIEW
A civil court in Eastern China has granted the plaintiff’s voluntary application to withdraw a lawsuit concerning a housing lease dispute. The case, filed by Ms. Zhao against Mr. Li and a real estate information services company, was dismissed on January 21, 2011. The court ordered the plaintiff to bear half of the total court acceptance fee of 500 yuan, amounting to 250 yuan.

CASE BACKGROUND AND FACTS
The plaintiff, Ms. Zhao, a female born on June 3, 1962, of Han ethnicity, initiated legal proceedings against two defendants in a housing lease dispute. The first defendant was Mr. Li, an individual. The second defendant was Shaanxi Kaiyanju Real Estate Information Services Company Limited, with Mr. Li serving as its legal representative and manager. The exact nature of the lease agreement and the specific claims made by Ms. Zhao were not detailed in the final court order, as the case did not proceed to a full hearing on the merits.

COURT PROCEEDINGS AND EVIDENCE
On January 21, 2011, before the court had rendered a substantive judgment, Ms. Zhao submitted a formal application to withdraw her lawsuit. The application was made voluntarily, and no evidence was presented or contested during the proceedings. The court reviewed the withdrawal request to ensure it complied with procedural requirements under applicable civil procedure law. No objections from the defendants were recorded in the court’s order.

COURT FINDINGS AND JUDGMENT
The court found that Ms. Zhao’s voluntary application to withdraw the lawsuit was legally permissible. According to the court’s ruling, the plaintiff’s decision to withdraw the case met the standards set forth in relevant civil procedure statutes. The court issued a formal ruling allowing the withdrawal. The judgment ordered that the case be dismissed and that the plaintiff bear the reduced court costs. Specifically, the court ruled that the total case acceptance fee of 500 yuan would be reduced by half to 250 yuan, payable by Ms. Zhao. The presiding judge, Mr. Cheng, signed the ruling on January 21, 2011, with the court clerk Ms. Li recording the proceeding.

KEY LEGAL PRINCIPLES
This case illustrates several fundamental principles in civil litigation. The principle of voluntary withdrawal allows a plaintiff to discontinue a lawsuit before a final judgment, provided the court approves. The court’s discretion to permit withdrawal ensures that plaintiffs are not forced to continue litigation against their will. The cost allocation rule demonstrated here shows that when a case is withdrawn before trial, the plaintiff typically bears only half of the standard court acceptance fee. This principle encourages parties to resolve disputes early without incurring full litigation expenses. The ruling also confirms that a court does not need to examine the substantive merits of a dispute when a plaintiff voluntarily withdraws.

PRACTICAL INSIGHTS
For parties involved in property or real estate disputes, this case highlights the strategic option of voluntary withdrawal. Plaintiffs who reassess their legal position or reach a settlement before trial can avoid the full costs and time of litigation. It is important to note that withdrawal does not necessarily bar a party from refiling the same claim in the future, depending on applicable law. Defendants should be aware that a withdrawal does not constitute a judgment on the merits and may not provide finality. Both parties should carefully consider the cost implications of early withdrawal, as court fees may be reduced but not entirely eliminated.

LEGAL REFERENCES
Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China (2007 Revision): Article 52, Article 131, Paragraph 1.

DISCLAIMER
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws and procedures may vary by jurisdiction. Readers should consult a qualified legal professional for advice specific to their situation.

This article is rewritten from public court documents for general reading only. It does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified attorney for specific legal matters.

All Real CasesLoan & DebtProperty & Real EstateContract & BusinessConsumer & Daily

About UsPrivacy PolicyDisclaimerContactTerms of Service

© 2026 Real Case Legal. All Rights Reserved.