【摘要】：近年來我國學(xué)術(shù)界、立法界與實務(wù)界都越來越關(guān)注并致力于各項證據(jù)規(guī)則的研究,以期構(gòu)建一套我國完善的證據(jù)規(guī)則體系。司法認(rèn)知規(guī)則作為英美傳統(tǒng)證據(jù)規(guī)則之一,是一項獨立的證據(jù)規(guī)則,是職權(quán)干預(yù)證明責(zé)任承擔(dān)的特殊規(guī)則,即凡屬于法定司法認(rèn)知范圍內(nèi)的事項,當(dāng)事人無需舉證、質(zhì)證,由法官依職權(quán)或依當(dāng)事人申請直接予以認(rèn)定。這項證據(jù)規(guī)則是一種司法捷徑,本身具有很強的研究價值,它是在保證不損害司法公正的前提下廢除了形式上對證據(jù)的要求,理由是證據(jù)在實際上并不必要。從這一點可以看出,司法認(rèn)知可以影響證明責(zé)任的分配,提高訴訟效率,節(jié)約司法資源�？v觀我國的司法認(rèn)知規(guī)則的情況,各項研究才剛剛起步,到目前我國的三大訴訟中尚無司法認(rèn)知這一個概念,也沒有相關(guān)的內(nèi)容涉及到司法認(rèn)知,只有最高人民法院和最高人民檢察院頒布的相關(guān)司法解釋被學(xué)者們認(rèn)為是與司法認(rèn)知相關(guān)的規(guī)定。這項規(guī)則的缺失一定程度上既不利于規(guī)范法官的職權(quán)范圍與當(dāng)事人的舉證活動的有序進行,也不利于克服司法實踐中存在的訴訟效率低下與司法資源嚴(yán)重不足的矛盾現(xiàn)象。 本文立足于這一現(xiàn)狀,以司法認(rèn)知的基本問題為出發(fā)點,以司法認(rèn)知的對象為側(cè)重點,以司法認(rèn)知的程序為手段,以我國司法認(rèn)知規(guī)則的研究現(xiàn)狀為切入點,以期為我國司法認(rèn)知規(guī)則的構(gòu)建和發(fā)展找到突破口。 本文分為四個部分。總體是通過對司法認(rèn)知規(guī)則的規(guī)范的各個部分進行闡述,從而得出如何構(gòu)建司法規(guī)則的結(jié)論。第一部分為司法認(rèn)知的概論,主要介紹司法認(rèn)知的概念、特征、效力以及與其他概念的區(qū)分,從而對其有一個較為明晰的了解；第二部分為司法認(rèn)知的對象,主要探究司法認(rèn)知的范圍有哪些；第三部分為司法認(rèn)知的程序,探討的主要目的是控制法官自由裁量權(quán),從而有效保障當(dāng)事人的訴訟權(quán)利的實現(xiàn)；第四部分是對如何在我國證據(jù)法中構(gòu)建司法認(rèn)知規(guī)則的探討,這是本文的落腳點也是重點。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the academic, legislative and practical circles of our country have paid more and more attention to the study of the rules of evidence in order to construct a perfect system of the rules of evidence in our country. As one of the traditional evidence rules in Britain and America, the judicial notice rule is an independent evidence rule, which is a special rule of power intervention to bear the burden of proof, that is, the parties do not need to prove and cross-examine the matters falling within the scope of legal judicial notice. It shall be determined directly by the judge ex officio or upon the application of the parties. This rule of evidence is a kind of judicial shortcut, which has a strong research value. It abolishes the formal requirement of evidence on the premise of not harming judicial justice, on the grounds that evidence is not necessary in practice. From this, we can see that judicial notice can affect the distribution of burden of proof, improve the efficiency of litigation and save judicial resources. Looking at the situation of judicial notice rules in our country, all kinds of research have just started. To the present, there is no concept of judicial notice in the three major litigation in our country, and there is no related content related to judicial notice. Only the judicial interpretation issued by the Supreme people's Court and the Supreme people's Procuratorate is considered by scholars to be related to judicial notice. To a certain extent, the absence of this rule is not conducive to standardizing the jurisdiction of the judge and the orderly conduct of the parties' evidential activities, nor is it conducive to overcoming the contradiction between the inefficiency of litigation and the serious shortage of judicial resources in judicial practice. Based on the present situation, this paper takes the basic problems of judicial notice as the starting point, the object of judicial notice as the focal point, the procedure of judicial notice as the means, and the current research situation of the rules of judicial notice as the breakthrough point. In order to find a breakthrough for the construction and development of judicial notice rules in China. This paper is divided into four parts. In general, the conclusion of how to construct judicial rules is obtained by expounding each part of the norms of judicial notice rules. The first part is an overview of judicial notice, mainly introduces the concept of judicial notice, characteristics, effectiveness and the distinction from other concepts, so as to have a relatively clear understanding of it; the second part is the object of judicial notice. The third part is the procedure of judicial notice, the main purpose of the discussion is to control the discretion of the judge, so as to effectively guarantee the realization of the litigant's right of action. The fourth part discusses how to construct the rules of judicial notice in the evidence law of our country, which is also the focus of this paper.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D916

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 汪超;蔡杰;;對司法認(rèn)知若干問題的反思——兼論相關(guān)制度的構(gòu)建[J];長江論壇;2007年04期

2 張乾雷;;美國司法認(rèn)知對象研究[J];研究生法學(xué);2008年02期

3 彭海青;論刑事訴訟中的司法認(rèn)知規(guī)則[J];郴州師范高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報;2001年01期

4 寧松,王志華;自認(rèn)規(guī)則在刑事訴訟中的運用[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2001年09期

5 陸佳微,于海龍;英國司法制度下的“司法認(rèn)知”——兼析The Peninsular&Oriental Branch Service v.The Common Wealth Shipping Representative(“The Geelong”)案[J];大連海事大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2005年01期

6 余濤,劉誼軍;民事訴訟司法認(rèn)知對象范圍探討[J];廣西政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報;2002年04期

7 閻朝秀;;司法認(rèn)知——既判力事實的另一視角[J];貴州社會科學(xué);2007年05期

8 閻朝秀;;司法認(rèn)知:證明責(zé)任的新視角[J];河北法學(xué);2006年12期

9 王永挺,王魯峰;論司法認(rèn)知[J];科學(xué)·經(jīng)濟·社會;2002年01期

10 葉自強;司法認(rèn)知論[J];法學(xué)研究;1996年04期

，

本文編號：2210007