【摘要】：離婚損害賠償制度作為一種救濟(jì)制度，由2001年修正后的《中華人民共和國婚姻法》加以確立,它填補(bǔ)了新中國有史以來婚姻損害賠償制度的立法空白。近年來，我國離婚案件呈逐年上升趨勢，而離婚損害賠償制度的實際作用卻非常有限，舉證困難的問題在訴訟中日益突顯，，使得該制度的實際執(zhí)行效果與預(yù)期效果相差很大，已經(jīng)遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)違背了當(dāng)初設(shè)立的初衷，成為完善該制度亟待解決的問題。本文以婚外情、家庭暴力等法定過錯為主要研究對象,采用法解釋學(xué)、法社會學(xué)以及比較研究等方法，結(jié)合基層案例和數(shù)據(jù)，對離婚損害賠償訴訟舉證困難的表現(xiàn)形式、形成原因進(jìn)行探討，從而提出解決建議，對完善離婚損害賠償制度有重要的現(xiàn)實意義和一定的理論價值。 根據(jù)我國《婚姻法》及相關(guān)解釋規(guī)定，無過錯方要想獲得賠償就必須舉證證明過錯行為，但由于婚外情、家庭暴力通常具有較高隱秘性，又受到傳統(tǒng)思想和法律文化的影響，當(dāng)事人往往很難依靠自己收集到證據(jù)。不少當(dāng)事人轉(zhuǎn)而依靠私人偵探，而私人偵探的主體以及取證方式的合法性同樣令人堪憂，私錄私拍的視聽證據(jù)又常因為程序瑕疵被認(rèn)定為非法證據(jù)。從司法案例和基層數(shù)據(jù)中可以看出證據(jù)保存差、證據(jù)來源少、證據(jù)效力弱、非法證據(jù)多成為了舉證困難的主要表現(xiàn)形式。因此，本文重點從法理、制度、現(xiàn)實三方面提出解決建議。首先，從法理層面協(xié)調(diào)權(quán)利沖突。調(diào)和公民隱私權(quán)和夫妻知情權(quán)，凡涉及配偶及家庭利益的，應(yīng)屬于夫妻知情權(quán)的范疇，其他的屬于個人隱私，使之形成和諧共生的均衡狀態(tài)。其次，從制度層面調(diào)整證據(jù)規(guī)則。針對私錄私拍證據(jù)認(rèn)定的局限性，通過細(xì)化合法證據(jù)規(guī)定，明確證據(jù)收集禁止方法，區(qū)分對象、場所有條件確認(rèn)，在緊急情況下允許限制他人權(quán)利的舉證行為，適當(dāng)擴(kuò)大法官取舍證據(jù)的自由裁量權(quán)；針對私人偵探的合法性疑問，規(guī)范私人偵探行業(yè)，嚴(yán)格注冊登記，提高準(zhǔn)入門檻，出臺相關(guān)法律法規(guī)，加強(qiáng)相關(guān)政府部門監(jiān)管，提高私力救濟(jì)水平；針對舉證責(zé)任分配不公平，由無過錯方對其主張承擔(dān)初步的證明責(zé)任，法院結(jié)合舉證能力和舉證妨礙的考慮，有條件采用舉證責(zé)任倒置；針對證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不合理，引入相對優(yōu)勢證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，但應(yīng)當(dāng)有所限制，如不適用獨(dú)任制審判，判決理由明示，非程序或邏輯錯誤不得改判。最后，從現(xiàn)實層面拓寬取證途徑。引入“調(diào)查令制度”，當(dāng)有知情者不愿作證時，可向法院提出申請強(qiáng)制提供證據(jù)；對舉證過程中可能產(chǎn)生的二次傷害，采取舉證保障性措施；法院和相關(guān)基層單位應(yīng)發(fā)揮作用，加強(qiáng)對當(dāng)事人的舉證指導(dǎo)，有必要時應(yīng)進(jìn)行職權(quán)調(diào)查。 本文的創(chuàng)新之處在于選題具有開拓性，并且充分融入了司法實踐經(jīng)驗和數(shù)據(jù)，在已有理論研究的基礎(chǔ)上引入調(diào)查令制度、人身安全保障措施等司法試點項目。由于筆者的民法理論功底尚不夠深厚，特別是受制于外語材料和閱讀能力的有限，在比較研究上，受到一定的局限。
[Abstract]:As a relief system, the divorce damage compensation system was established by the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China amended in 2001. It fills in the legislative gap of the marriage damage compensation system in the history of New China. The difficulty of proof is becoming increasingly prominent in litigation, which makes the actual implementation effect of the system very different from the expected effect. It has gone against the original intention of the establishment of the system and become an urgent problem to be solved. And comparative study and other methods, combined with grass-roots cases and data, to divorce damages litigation difficult to prove the manifestations of the formation of reasons, and thus put forward solutions, to improve the divorce damages system has important practical significance and certain theoretical value.
According to China's Marriage Law and relevant interpretations, the innocent party must prove the fault if he wants to get compensation. However, due to extramarital affairs, domestic violence is usually highly secretive and influenced by traditional ideas and legal culture, it is often difficult for the party concerned to collect evidence by himself. The main body of the private detective and the legality of the way of obtaining evidence are also worrying. Privately recorded audio-visual evidence is often regarded as illegal evidence because of procedural flaws. Therefore, this paper puts forward some suggestions from three aspects: jurisprudence, system and reality. Firstly, the conflict of rights should be coordinated from the legal level. Secondly, we should adjust the evidence rules from the system level. In view of the limitations of the identification of private record evidence, we should clarify the prohibition method of evidence collection, distinguish the objects, confirm the premises conditionally, permit the restriction of other people's rights in case of emergency, and appropriately expand the discretion of the judge to accept or reject evidence. In view of the unfair distribution of burden of proof, the non-fault party shall bear the preliminary burden of proof for its claim, and the court shall combine the ability of proof with the hindrance of proof. Consideration, conditional use of inversion of the burden of proof; in view of the unreasonable standard of proof, the introduction of comparative advantage standard of proof, but should be limited, such as not applicable to a sole trial, the reason for the decision is clear, non-procedural or logical errors can not be changed. When they wish to testify, they may apply to the court for compulsory evidence; take safeguards against the possible secondary injury in the process of proof; the court and relevant grass-roots units should play a role in strengthening the guidance of the parties to the proof, and investigate their powers and powers when necessary.
The innovation of this paper is that the topic is pioneering, and fully incorporates the judicial practice experience and data. On the basis of the existing theoretical research, the author introduces the investigation order system, personal security measures and other judicial pilot projects. Limitations in comparative study are limited.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華僑大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D923.9

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條

1 張海敏;;從倫理學(xué)角度淺析離婚損害賠償制度的完善[J];道德與文明;2007年02期

2 何家弘;證據(jù)意識漫談[J];法學(xué)雜志;1998年03期

3 孫海波,王連清;試論私人偵探在我國的可行性問題[J];公安研究;2004年10期

4 苗偉;劉銀祥;秦偉;;民間調(diào)查行業(yè)現(xiàn)狀研究[J];公安研究;2008年07期

5 張新寶;;隱私權(quán)研究[J];法學(xué)研究;1990年03期

6 李浩;;民事判決中的舉證責(zé)任分配——以《公報》案例為樣本的分析[J];清華法學(xué);2008年06期

7 馬強(qiáng);試論配偶權(quán)[J];法學(xué)論壇;2000年02期

8 石春玲,田耘;婚外戀的道德與法律評價——兼評婚姻家庭法草案相關(guān)規(guī)定[J];政法論叢;1998年05期

本文編號：2234126