本文選題：調(diào)查取證　切入點(diǎn)：律師調(diào)查令　出處：《湘潭大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：證據(jù)是法院對(duì)民事案件進(jìn)行審理和裁判的關(guān)鍵和根本。隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展，我國民商事案件的當(dāng)事人申請(qǐng)調(diào)查取證的案件也隨之增加，但司法實(shí)踐中當(dāng)事人調(diào)查取證難的情況非常普遍，這在很大程度上侵犯了當(dāng)事人調(diào)取證據(jù)的權(quán)利，也影響了當(dāng)事人的舉證能力，往往導(dǎo)致當(dāng)事人陷入“有理說不清”的境地。由于現(xiàn)行制度根本無法保障當(dāng)事人調(diào)查取證的權(quán)利，使當(dāng)事人的舉證能力受限而承擔(dān)敗訴風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，無法實(shí)現(xiàn)其訴訟目的，，最終使得民事訴訟追求實(shí)體公正、保障當(dāng)事人合法權(quán)益的價(jià)值目標(biāo)也就難以實(shí)現(xiàn)。 由于審判方式改革的不斷推進(jìn)，我國法院的訴訟模式也隨之逐步改革，目前正處于由過去的職權(quán)主義模式逐步向當(dāng)事人主義訴訟模式過渡的階段�！罢l主張，誰舉證”這一訴訟原則已成為民事證據(jù)領(lǐng)域的基本規(guī)則，因而當(dāng)事人對(duì)自己所提出的主張負(fù)有調(diào)查、收集證據(jù)的責(zé)任。當(dāng)事人的證明責(zé)任得到有效的落實(shí)與分配之后，法官調(diào)查收取證據(jù)也隨之由過去的超主導(dǎo)包攬舉證模式逐步向限制舉證方向進(jìn)行轉(zhuǎn)變，這一轉(zhuǎn)變從司法實(shí)踐來看，無疑更有利于司法公正。但是我們知道，任何事物的發(fā)展都有兩面性，當(dāng)事人證明責(zé)任的落實(shí)，雖然大大提高了當(dāng)事人調(diào)查取證的積極性，但隨之也逐步突顯出來了當(dāng)事人舉證難等各種問題。為破解這已難題，我國很多地方都相繼實(shí)行了調(diào)查令制度，以進(jìn)一步落實(shí)當(dāng)事人的舉證責(zé)任，維護(hù)當(dāng)事人權(quán)益，實(shí)現(xiàn)司法公正。
[Abstract]:Evidence is the key and fundamental for the court to try and adjudicate civil cases. With the development of the economy, the number of cases in which the parties in civil and commercial cases apply for investigation and collection of evidence has increased. However, in judicial practice, it is very common for the parties to investigate and collect evidence, which to a large extent infringes the right of the parties to obtain evidence, and also affects the party's ability to prove evidence. Because the current system can not guarantee the right of the parties to investigate and collect evidence, so that the parties' ability of proof is limited and they bear the risk of losing the lawsuit, they are unable to achieve the purpose of the lawsuit, because the current system can not guarantee the right of the parties to investigate and collect evidence. Finally, it is difficult to realize the value goal of protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the parties because of the pursuit of substantive justice in civil litigation. As a result of the continuous progress of the reform of the trial mode, the litigation mode of the courts in our country has also been gradually reformed. At present, it is at the stage of transition from the past mode of authority doctrine to the mode of litigant litigation. "who claims that," The principle of "who adduces evidence" has become the basic rule in the field of civil evidence, so the parties have the responsibility to investigate and collect evidence for their claims, and after the burden of proof of the parties has been effectively implemented and distributed, The judge's investigation and collection of evidence has gradually shifted from the past mode of super-dominated collection of evidence to the direction of limiting proof, which is undoubtedly more conducive to judicial justice from the point of view of judicial practice. But we know that, There are two sides to the development of anything. The implementation of the burden of proof of the parties has greatly increased the enthusiasm of the parties to investigate and collect evidence, but it has also gradually highlighted various problems such as the difficulty of proving evidence by the parties. In order to solve this problem, In order to further implement the burden of proof, safeguard the rights and interests of the parties, and realize judicial justice, many places in our country have carried out the investigation order system one after another.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D926.5

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 韋楊;曾俊怡;劉亞玲;;當(dāng)事人調(diào)查取證權(quán)之程序保障的路徑嘗試 以調(diào)查令制度的檢討及其實(shí)證量化分析為研究視點(diǎn)[J];法律適用;2008年03期

2 湯嘯天;張進(jìn)德;江晨;梁玉超;;調(diào)查令制度的法律屬性與完善建議[J];法律適用;2008年07期

3 魏斌;論辯護(hù)律師調(diào)取有關(guān)材料權(quán)[J];中央政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1998年03期

4 錢雄偉;;律師調(diào)查令正當(dāng)性的法理思考[J];廣西青年干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2006年04期

5 繆苗;;完善民事證據(jù)調(diào)查令制度的設(shè)想[J];理論界;2006年05期

6 司春燕;淺析辯護(hù)律師的調(diào)查取證權(quán)[J];攀登;2002年06期

7 任強(qiáng);;光榮、夢(mèng)想與墮落——法律職業(yè)化進(jìn)程中的律師與法官[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)論壇;2011年01期

8 田平安,李浩;中國民事檢察監(jiān)督制度的改革與完善[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2004年01期

9 陶婷;;文書提出命令的適用范圍探討[J];西南政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2008年02期

10 羅飛云;;論法院依職權(quán)調(diào)查取證[J];揚(yáng)州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年03期

本文編號(hào)：1653924