涉港澳民事诉讼在中国大陆民事诉讼分类中归入“涉外”之列,审限管理与普通民事案件区别对待;前者为裁量审限,后者则规定审限。这种区别对待既缺乏法理依据,也已不符合实际需要,因而应当改革。但由于严格考核下的审限制度本身存在诸多弊端,并不具备实际诉讼周期控制以及提高司法效率的比较优势,因而涉外民商事案件审限参照普通民事案件审限管理并不具有合理性。应当以保障司法品质为导向,不区分案件性质,一律合理控制案件诉讼周期而非审限,从而实现涉外民事案件审限管理的去特殊化。 Civil litigation involving Hong Kong and Maucao is classified as “foreign-related” in the category of civil litigation in mainland China, and the trial management is different from ordinary civil cases; the former is discretionary and the latter provides judicial review. This kind of discrimination does not have the legal basis and is not in line with actual needs and should be reformed. However, there are many drawbacks to the judicial review system under the strict examination, which does not have the control over the actual litigation cycle and the comparative advantage of improving the judicial efficiency. Therefore, it is not reasonable to judge the trial of civil and commercial cases in reference to the trial management of ordinary civil cases. It should take the protection of judicial quality as the orientation, and do not differentiate the nature of the case, and control all the cases’ litigation cycle rather than the trial limit, so as to realize the de-specialization of trial management of foreign-related civil cases.