It is generally difficult to withdraw and it is also difficult to go to court. Look at the following online excerpts and you will understand: Can college students refund their tuition fees? The first case of tuition refund dispute in the province triggered a dispute over the management right of colleges and universities [2006-1-818: 02: 00 | Author: Lv Huaibo]. Students drop out of school, and the school does not refund tuition and fees. In order to recover tuition fees, Wu, a former Jimei University student, took his alma mater to court, which triggered the first educational service contract dispute case in the province demanding a refund of tuition and miscellaneous fees. A few days ago, the reporter learned from the jimei district court that the case ended in an out-of-court settlement. Wu withdrew the lawsuit, but neither side would disclose how much tuition Jimei University eventually refunded. The dispute over tuition refund has come to an end. But how to define the rights and obligations between universities and students? This issue is still controversial. Relevant experts believe that this case involves the right of independent management of colleges and universities and the relationship between the rights and obligations of both parties, highlighting the relevant legal gaps. ■ Reporter Chen Jieli Qing Xue University Student: I should pay my tuition when I drop out of school. Wu Yuan is a sophomore in Jimei University Vocational and Technical College. In August 2004, Wu paid tuition and miscellaneous fees1100 yuan to the school on time. By June 1 1, Xiao Wu didn't want to take such a technical class anymore. He wants to go back to his hometown in Shanghai to find a job. 1 1 In June, he applied to the school to drop out of school, and the school agreed to his application, but did not agree to refund tuition and fees. Wu Shuo, when choosing a school and major, didn't know the real situation of the school in detail. After entering the school, he now regrets his choice and feels that he is not suitable for his college and major. In this case, students should have the right to make new choices about their future life path. Wu Shuo: "It is neither fair nor reasonable for schools not to refund tuition fees. The school is strong and the students are weak. It is up to the school to decide whether the tuition will be refunded or not, but the tuition we pay can't just evaporate. " At the end of last year, in order to get the tuition back, Wu took his alma mater, Jimei University, to court and asked Jimei University to refund the tuition and miscellaneous fees for the remaining class hours, totaling 9,267 yuan. Jimei district court accepted the case. Jimei University: The school stipulates that tuition fees will not be refunded for Wu's lawsuit. Jimei University argues that there is an educational administrative relationship between the school and the students, and the examination and approval of dropping out of school is an administrative act stipulated by the student status management, which is not an agreement and is not a civil contract relationship between equal subjects. Tuition in institutions of higher learning belongs to the state administrative fees, and the refund should be implemented according to the regulations. However, the current laws of the country and the rules and regulations of relevant departments do not stipulate that students can refund their tuition fees when they drop out of school. In addition, the state administrative regulations give institutions of higher learning the right to operate independently, and institutions of higher learning have the right to formulate and implement various management systems. The Notice of Jimei University on Issues Related to Students' Suspension, Repetition and Repetition authorized by the administrative regulations of the state and the Law of Jimei University on the Management of Students' Payment clearly stipulate that tuition fees, miscellaneous fees and accommodation fees of students who have suspended from school will not be refunded; The national financial allocation accounts for about four-fifths of the education funds in colleges and universities, while the tuition fees charged by schools to students according to law only account for one-fifth of the education funds. Students drop out of school, but the school can't recruit other candidates, which is bound to waste the school's teaching resources and cause irreparable losses to the school. The cost is 2000 yuan, which has actually been paid by the school on behalf of Wu. Therefore, it is unreasonable for Wu to ask for a refund of tuition fees now. Su, Judge of jimei district Court: Legal blank causes controversy. Xiao Wu sued the court, and after the trial, the two parties negotiated and finally reached an out-of-court settlement. The school refunded part of Wu's tuition, and Wu agreed to drop the lawsuit. Although the case was finally settled, Su, the presiding judge of this case, believed that the legal problems caused by this were thought-provoking. Should tuition be refunded? At present, the law does not clearly stipulate. From a fair and reasonable point of view, it is also different. Su believes that the relationship between institutions of higher learning and students is often a relationship between management and being managed, such as daily teaching arrangements and degree status management, but not all the relationships between institutions of higher learning and students involved belong to educational administration. In this case, the court should accept the dispute that students drop out of school and ask for a refund as a new type of civil dispute. Su also pointed out that the national administrative regulations give universities certain management autonomy, but it is not clear whether the various management systems unilaterally formulated are binding on students. Or what procedures are needed to be effective? Is the relationship between school and students an educational administrative relationship between management and managed, or a civil contract relationship between equal subjects? Or both? Because the current laws and regulations of the country have not made corresponding clear provisions, the blank of the law makes the judges in the case disagree, which affects the judicial authority and seriously restricts the development of education. In this regard, Judge Su suggested that both the legislative and judicial circles should pay attention to it and improve it in theory and practice as soon as possible. Professor Liao Yixin from Xiamen University Law School: The multiple identities of public universities are the root of the problem. Professor Liao Yixin believes that such disputes between students and universities are mainly caused by the multiple identities of Chinese universities. He said that there is a multi-level relationship between universities and students. First of all, schools, especially public schools, as institutions of higher education, perform administrative and social functions such as training reserve cadres and talents for the country and various industries, and educating and managing students. Secondly, the relationship between students and schools. Students pay tuition fees to receive educational services, and there is also an educational service contract relationship between the two parties. This contractual relationship determines that both parties should also abide by some basic principles of contract law. After students are admitted to colleges and universities, the two sides form an actual contractual relationship. If the school does not inform the students in advance that there is a policy of no refund for dropping out of school, and agrees with the students' application for dropping out of school, then the school should refund the tuition fees, but the corresponding expenses of the education services that the students have already consumed can be deducted. However, if the school has clearly informed the students in advance that the school stipulates that tuition fees cannot be refunded when dropping out of school, then the school can not refund. In our country, since schools are legal persons of public institutions, they should have certain independent management rights. Under the condition of not violating the national education law, colleges and universities have the right to formulate the internal management regulations of non-refundable fees for dropping out of school, because in the reality that there is a big gap between the current state funding and the funding needs of colleges and universities, colleges and universities also need to charge students a certain amount of tuition and fees to maintain their operation. The school clearly informs the candidates in advance that the school has such provisions in the enrollment brochure, which can be understood as a contract offer. If students feel unfair, they can choose not to apply to this school but to other schools without such regulations. According to the Interim Law on the Management of Private Education Fees (Draft for Comment) promulgated by the National Development and Reform Commission, students in private schools should refund certain fees according to the actual situation. However, the relationship between public schools and students is not purely contractual. Both the Education Law and the Higher Education Law stipulate that education should first cultivate builders and successors of the socialist cause with all-round development in morality, intelligence and physique for the country; Secondly, the education funds of public schools are mainly allocated by the state, and the tuition fees collected should be turned over to the finance, and schools are not the real owners of tuition fees. Schools also have considerable administrative power, such as student status management, reward or punishment, and awarding academic qualifications and degree certificates. Professor Liao said: "In some disputes between universities and students, the relevant laws and regulations in China are not very specific. In the future, with more and more schools and students having new choices, this kind of thing may happen more often. To solve this problem fundamentally, it is best to further clarify and refine the relevant provisions in legislation. Otherwise, it is easy to cause legal disputes by unilaterally formulating internal regulations in colleges and universities, and some students do not buy it. " Lawyer Lin Zhiming of Fujian Lingyi Law Firm: The contract law should be applied to this case. There is both an educational service contract relationship and an administrative legal relationship between universities and students. These two legal relations go hand in hand and are regulated by China's civil law and administrative law respectively. In this case, the student's request for refund of tuition fees is legally a request to cancel the education service contract and refund the service price. Disputes arising on this issue belong to civil disputes, and the contract law should be applied. If students can prove that their request for withdrawal and refund is due to the poor quality of school teaching, the purpose of higher education service contract cannot be achieved; Then in this case, it is a breach of contract by the school and tuition fees should be refunded. If a student asks to drop out of school only for his own reasons, it is a student's breach of contract, and the student should bear the responsibility for breach of contract to the university. After compensating for the losses caused by dropping out of college, tuition fees, if any, should also be returned to students. In this case, the two parties agreed to terminate the education service contract, and there was no question of which party breached the contract. However, the two sides did not reach an agreement on the issue of tuition refund. From a fair and reasonable point of view, if the school can't prove its loss, it should refund the tuition. The right of independent management of colleges and universities is aimed at the relationship between colleges and their administrative departments (such as the Ministry of Education), not the relationship between colleges and students. It means that colleges and universities have the right to formulate some school rules and regulations except those promulgated by their administrative departments, not that colleges and universities have the right to manage all students and do not allow students to raise any objections. With the marketization of higher education, civil disputes between students and universities may increase gradually, which requires paying attention to students' individual rights, correctly treating the equal relationship between students and universities, and making fair judgments instead of shirking contradictions. In addition, in the legislation of higher education, we should listen to the opinions of the parents of students who are taxpayers, so that higher education, a public service supported by taxpayers, can better reflect the interests of citizens. Related links (Wu's entrusted agent): Agent Dear presiding judge and judge: Fujian Zhongyu Law Firm accepts Wu's entrustment according to law and assigns lawyers to participate in litigation activities between the client and Jimei University. I hereby give the following lawyer's opinions on this case for the court's reference: 1. If the school infringes on the legitimate rights and interests of the educated, "if it causes losses or damages, it shall bear civil liability according to law". Article 29 of the Higher Education Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) stipulates that schools and other educational institutions should fulfill their obligations, including "abiding by laws and regulations", "implementing the national education policy and implementing the national education and teaching standards to ensure the quality of education and teaching", "safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of educated people, teachers and other employees" and "charging fees and making public the charging items in accordance with relevant state regulations". Article 42 of the law stipulates that the rights enjoyed by the educated include: "If they are dissatisfied with the punishment given by the school, they shall appeal to the relevant departments, appeal to the school and teachers for infringing their personal rights, property rights and other legitimate rights and interests, or bring a lawsuit according to law" and "other rights stipulated by laws and regulations". Article 8 1 of the law stipulates that "anyone who violates the provisions of this law and infringes on the legitimate rights and interests of teachers, educatees, schools or other educational institutions and causes losses or damages shall bear civil liability according to law". In this case, the plaintiff only received the defendant's education for less than three months in 2004, but demanded the annual fee, which unfairly damaged the property rights. The defendant shall bear the civil liability for returning the expenses according to law. Two, the plaintiff and the defendant formed a contractual relationship on the content of education. The dispute between the original defendant and the defendant is not a question of student status, degree, education background or dropping out of school, nor is it a contradiction between management and being managed, but a question of how to settle the expenses after the defendant terminates the education service, which is a civil rights and obligations dispute between equal subjects. 1. Plaintiff's application for admission to education is an independent exercise of civil rights stipulated by the Constitution and laws according to law. According to article 46 of the Constitution of People's Republic of China (PRC), "People's Republic of China (PRC) citizens have the right and obligation to receive education". Article 9 of the Higher Education Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) further stipulates that "citizens have the right to receive higher education according to law". As an adult, the defendant needs and receives higher education, not nine-year compulsory education. The plaintiff's right to education neither comes from the administrative organ, nor can it be artificially restricted, deprived or hindered by the administrative organ. Entering the examination and the defendant's office for education is the plaintiff's independent exercise of the right to education, not the result of specific administrative actions such as orders, requirements and designation of administrative organs. The plaintiff's right to education is equal to the obligation of the school to provide education, and its status is equal to that of the defendant. 2. The defendant enrolls students and provides education services, which is an independent civil act of the defendant, not a specific administrative act. According to article 1 1 of the Higher Education Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), "institutions of higher learning should face the society, study independently according to law and implement democratic management". Articles 32, 33 and 34 stipulate that "institutions of higher learning shall formulate enrollment plans according to social needs, school conditions and school scale approved by the state, and independently adjust the enrollment ratio of departments". "Colleges and universities independently set and adjust disciplines and majors according to law." Colleges and universities independently make teaching plans, choose teaching materials and organize teaching activities according to teaching needs. Therefore, in the case that the enrollment plan, enrollment ratio, discipline and specialty, teaching plan and teaching materials are completely decided by the defendant, the educational services provided by the defendant cannot be regarded as the behavior of the state or administrative organs, and their status is equal to that of the educated, and they are all equal civil subjects. The statement that the status of educational institutions is higher than that of educated people cannot be established. 3. The plaintiff and the defendant form a contractual relationship on education, and this relationship will not change its nature because of the intervention of national laws or the supervision and management of industry authorities. In China, almost every industry must operate according to law and accept the supervision and management of the competent department. For example, hospitals are supervised by health authorities, real estate enterprises are supervised by construction departments, and various departments have also issued departmental rules and normative documents, but we cannot think that the behavior of each industry itself is an administrative behavior. Article 54 of the Higher Education Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) stipulates that "students in institutions of higher learning shall pay tuition fees in accordance with state regulations". Article 64 stipulates that "tuition fees charged by institutions of higher learning shall be managed and used in accordance with relevant state regulations, and no other organization or individual may misappropriate them". These regulations are the provisions of national laws on tuition fees, and there is no essential difference between them and other laws on the management of the industry. We must never arbitrarily assume that the act of charging tuition fees is an administrative act just because the national laws mention tuition fees, which is logically unreasonable. Otherwise, isn't it because the medical expenses charged by hospitals and the business income of companies (especially state-owned enterprises) have to comply with the regulations of the Ministry of Finance and State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China, which have become administrative actions? Moreover, according to article 64, it is the school that collects tuition fees, and it is also the school that manages and uses tuition fees. Tuition is an important part of school business income. How to collect and refund tuition fees has become an administrative act. 4. The defendant bears legal liability independently according to law, and the public or government support cannot deny the defendant's civil subject status. According to the provisions of Article 30 of the Higher Education Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), "Institutions of higher learning shall obtain legal person status from the date of approval. The president of an institution of higher learning is the legal representative of an institution of higher learning. Institutions of higher learning enjoy civil rights and bear civil responsibilities in civil activities according to law. " Therefore, even if the government provides financial support to the defendant, the legal status of the defendant will not change, and his civil activities will not become administrative acts. Otherwise, isn't the charging behavior of wholly state-owned enterprises (such as many state-owned banks and hospitals) all administrative behavior? Therefore, the defendant should bear civil liability for the consequences of his termination of education services and cannot shirk it to the relevant education authorities. Three, the internal regulations formulated by the school must be legal and let the educated know, which is the premise for the educated to abide by. 1, the rules and regulations formulated by the school must be legal, otherwise they are invalid. Article 4 of the General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) stipulates: "Civil activities shall follow the principles of voluntariness, fairness, compensation for equal value, honesty and credibility". Paragraph 2 of Article 53 of the Higher Education Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) stipulates that "the legitimate rights and interests of middle school students in institutions of higher learning are protected by law". Therefore, although the school has the right to issue a "notice" and formulate management measures, it must not violate the provisions of laws and regulations or make unfair and unreasonable provisions for the educated, otherwise its content will be invalid. As far as accommodation fees are concerned, the Notice on Issues Concerning Suspension of School, Suspension of School for Trial Reading and Re-reading (hereinafter referred to as the Notice) issued by the defendant on October 30, 2000 stipulates that students who have stayed in school for more than two months will not be refunded accommodation fees for this semester; In 2004, the Measures for the Administration of Student Fees in Jimei University (hereinafter referred to as the Measures) promulgated by various colleges and units also stipulated that as long as scholars drop out of school, their accommodation fees for the whole academic year will not be refunded. This unilateral and arbitrary introduction of regulations and arbitrary deprivation of students' rights should not be supported. As far as tuition fees are concerned, the defendant should return the remaining money after stopping providing educational services, but both the notice and the law require that all tuition fees for the whole school year and two semesters be withheld, which is obviously unfair. It is neither legal nor reasonable to ask students to be forced to accept these regulations. 2. The rules and regulations formulated by the defendant must be published or made known to the educated. Judging from the provisions of China's Legislative Law, even laws, regulations and rules must be published before they can take effect, and the internal rules and regulations formulated by the defendant must also be published for students to know before they can take effect. You can't make it unilaterally, but you will take it out as a basis for handling student disputes when necessary. In this case, the defendant's "notice" was sent to "all colleges, departments and relevant units", and students were never informed or reminded of the regulations on tuition refund. In July 2004, the defendant issued the Law on the Management of Student Payment in Jimei University to "all colleges (departments) and relevant units", but it was not released to the students. Later, the defendant began to print the student handbook and wanted to concentrate the relevant rules and regulations in the student handbook. However, this manual, which was printed in July, had not been distributed to the plaintiff when she dropped out of school, and the defendant obviously had no legal basis. Four. Other questions 1. In the defense, the defendant believed that the plaintiff caused the loss of the school, but did not provide evidence to support the existence of the loss, nor did he determine and provide the amount of the loss, nor did he file a counterclaim. Therefore, the claim cannot exempt the defendant from responsibility. There is no cause of action in this case. According to the Supreme People's Court's Notice on Printing and Distributing the Provisions on the Cause of Action of Civil Cases (for Trial Implementation), "The Provisions (for Trial Implementation) only lists the legal relationship part of the disputes between the parties, and the part of the disputes between the parties is determined by the accepting court according to the specific disputes of the parties." The Regulations (Trial) divides the causes of action into four parts, 54 categories and 300 kinds ... For the convenience of judicial statistics, a few causes of action list some special or common items (expressed by Arabic numerals and brackets) according to specific circumstances, but such causes of action are not limited to the items indicated. The people's court shall directly apply the cause of action or one of them in the case. "Therefore, the defendant thinks that' there is no educational contract dispute among the causes of contract disputes' is wrong, and its further claim that the rights and obligations of the original and the defendant are not equal is even more unfounded. To sum up, the plaintiff and the defendant have equal status in providing and receiving education. The plaintiff asked to drop out of school, in fact, he asked to terminate the contract. The defendant agreed that after the plaintiff dropped out of school, the contract was terminated and the defendant did not need to provide education services, so it did not violate the principle of fairness and reasonableness of civil law to refund the remaining part of the plaintiff's one-year fee in advance. Please ask the court to make a judgment according to law and safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the plaintiff. Thanks to Xu Changqing, lawyer of Fujian Zhongyu He Zhong Law Firm.