本文選題：證據(jù)制度　切入點：證據(jù)規(guī)則　出處：《上海海事大學》2004年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：證據(jù)是一切訴訟活動的核心，民事證據(jù)制度改革是民事審判改革的重要組成部分。本文筆者以民事訴訟模式和證據(jù)制度的關系理論為基礎，比較各國立法實踐，具體探討我國海事訴訟改革中的證據(jù)規(guī)則問題。 文章的第一部分通過各國的民事證據(jù)立法對比，提示了具體證據(jù)規(guī)則同民事訴訟模式的內在聯(lián)系。民事訴訟模式決定證據(jù)制度的立法模式和具體證據(jù)規(guī)則的設置�，F(xiàn)代各國民事訴訟模式在相互吸收職權式和對抗制的優(yōu)點和克服缺陷的過程中不斷趨同發(fā)展。我國尚未建立起一套完備系統(tǒng)的民事證據(jù)制度。我國民事證據(jù)制度的建立必須結合民事審判以引進當事人模式為方向的改革，豐富和完善具體動態(tài)和靜態(tài)的證據(jù)規(guī)則。 在第一部分奠定的理論基礎上，第二部分提出了海事訴訟證據(jù)改革先行的問題，，并選取證據(jù)調查制度和專家證人制度兩大海事訴訟特色證據(jù)問題詳細探討。海事訴訟特別程序法的規(guī)定和海商法的性質使當事人模式深入地滲透到海事審判中來。一般民事訴訟的證據(jù)規(guī)則本身就缺乏系統(tǒng)性和能動性，更不能夠適應海事審判的需要。因此，海事訴訟需要建立貼合其特色的證據(jù)規(guī)則，并且這些證據(jù)規(guī)則的制定很有向當事人模式下發(fā)展的最好的美國證據(jù)法和海事訴訟發(fā)展的最好的英國法學習借鑒的必要。在比較研究了英美相關方面的立法和實踐之后，筆者結合海事訴訟特別程序法的規(guī)定以及我國的海事司法實踐，分析得出：第一，我國海事訴訟中缺乏調動當事人積極性、保障證據(jù)收集的動態(tài)規(guī)則，不妨以船舶碰撞中的庭前證據(jù)交換制度為出發(fā)和參照，體系性的建立海事訴訟證據(jù)開示制度，配合海事訴訟證據(jù)保全制度，構成較為完整的海事訴訟證據(jù)調查制度；第二，一般民事訴訟中的鑒定制度已經完全不能滿足現(xiàn)代海事訴訟對于專家證據(jù)的需求，對于海事專家的法律地位、專家作證的方式、專家證人的限制等一系列問題都需要重新界定，這就必須考慮我國原有的大陸式鑒定制度，因此專家證人制度的建立當與鑒定制度重構并行，但是海事訴訟中可以先行以司法解釋等形式作出規(guī)定。 根據(jù)上述研究，筆者分別對于我國建立海事訴訟證據(jù)開示制度和統(tǒng)一專家證人制度提出了建議，希望對完善我國海事訴訟立法和證據(jù)制度改革有所幫助。
[Abstract]:Evidence is the core of all litigation activities, and the reform of civil evidence system is an important part of civil trial reform. This paper discusses the rule of evidence in the reform of maritime litigation in China. The first part of the article through the comparison of civil evidence legislation in various countries, The article points out the internal relation between the concrete evidence rules and the civil action mode. The legislative model and the concrete evidence rules of the civil action mode determine the evidence system. The advantages of anti-system and the process of overcoming defects have been developing. China has not yet established a complete and systematic system of civil evidence. The establishment of civil evidence system in our country must be combined with the reform of introducing the mode of litigants in civil trials. Enrich and improve the specific dynamic and static rules of evidence. On the basis of the theory laid in the first part, the second part puts forward the question of the reform of evidence in maritime litigation. And select evidence investigation system and expert witness system to discuss the characteristic evidence of maritime litigation in detail. The provisions of special procedure law of maritime litigation and the nature of maritime law make the mode of parties deeply infiltrate into maritime trial. ... the rules of evidence in general civil proceedings themselves are not systematic and dynamic, Even less able to meet the needs of maritime trials. Therefore, maritime litigation needs to establish evidentiary rules that suit its characteristics, Moreover, the formulation of these rules of evidence is necessary for the study and reference of the best American evidence law and the best English law for the development of maritime litigation in the model of the parties. After a comparative study of the relevant legislation and practice in the United States and the United States, Combined with the provisions of the special procedure law of maritime litigation and the maritime judicial practice of our country, the author concludes that: first, there is a lack of dynamic rules to arouse the enthusiasm of the parties and ensure the collection of evidence in our maritime litigation. Take the pre-court evidence exchange system in ship collision as the starting point and reference, systematically establish the maritime litigation evidence discovery system, cooperate with the maritime litigation evidence preservation system, constitute a relatively complete maritime litigation evidence investigation system; second, The appraisal system in general civil action has not been able to meet the demand for expert evidence in modern maritime litigation, and a series of problems need to be redefined, such as the legal status of maritime experts, the way of expert testimony, the limitation of expert witnesses, etc. Therefore, the establishment of the expert witness system should be parallel to the reconstruction of the appraisal system, but the maritime litigation can be stipulated in the form of judicial interpretation. According to the above research, the author puts forward some suggestions on establishing the evidence discovery system and unifying the expert witness system in our country, hoping to be helpful to improve the legislation and evidence system reform of maritime litigation in our country.
【學位授予單位】：上海海事大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2004
【分類號】：D925.13

【引證文獻】

相關期刊論文 前1條

1 吳衛(wèi)平;;論海事行政訴訟證據(jù)審查對海事執(zhí)法證據(jù)規(guī)范運用的引導[J];武漢交通職業(yè)學院學報;2011年02期

相關碩士學位論文 前1條

1 袁冬梅;論民事訴訟中專家證人制度[D];黑龍江大學;2012年

本文編號：1612945