發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-08-21 10:23

【摘要】：自由裁量權(quán)是法官在審判活動(dòng)中所享有的一項(xiàng)重要的權(quán)力，是連接法律條文和具體個(gè)案之間的紐帶。法官的自由裁量權(quán)可以分為事實(shí)認(rèn)定階段的自由裁量權(quán)和法律適用階段的自由裁量權(quán)。這兩個(gè)階段是緊密聯(lián)系的，法律適用以事實(shí)認(rèn)定為前提，事實(shí)認(rèn)定的正確與否直接影響到案件的公正性。 事實(shí)認(rèn)定階段，法官需要對(duì)證明責(zé)任的分配、證據(jù)的收集、證據(jù)能力的確認(rèn)和證明力大小的判斷這些方面行使自由裁量權(quán)。通過(guò)行使自由裁量權(quán)，法官得以形成內(nèi)心的確信，完成對(duì)案件事實(shí)的認(rèn)識(shí)，，為法律適用打下基礎(chǔ)。因此，法官在事實(shí)認(rèn)定中如何合法、合理的行使自由裁量權(quán)，對(duì)于案件的裁判具有十分重要的意義。當(dāng)前我國(guó)民事訴訟事實(shí)認(rèn)定中法官自由裁量權(quán)缺少明確的運(yùn)行規(guī)則，缺乏有效的制約手段，客觀上為自由裁量權(quán)的濫用打開(kāi)了方便之門(mén)。 針對(duì)我國(guó)當(dāng)前事實(shí)認(rèn)定中法官的自由裁量權(quán)客觀上處于無(wú)序狀態(tài)這一現(xiàn)實(shí)，筆者對(duì)自由裁量權(quán)理論進(jìn)行系統(tǒng)的闡述，對(duì)事實(shí)認(rèn)定中證明責(zé)任分配、證據(jù)收集、證據(jù)能力確定已經(jīng)證明力大小的判斷幾個(gè)方面法官的自由裁量權(quán)進(jìn)行詳細(xì)的分析，并討論對(duì)自由裁量權(quán)的規(guī)制措施。筆者在對(duì)自由裁量權(quán)進(jìn)行細(xì)致分析的基礎(chǔ)上，借鑒國(guó)外的有關(guān)規(guī)定，結(jié)合我國(guó)的司法實(shí)踐，提出自己的若干見(jiàn)解，希望能夠?qū)σ?guī)范我國(guó)民事訴訟事實(shí)認(rèn)定中法官對(duì)自由裁量權(quán)的行使提供一定的參考。
[Abstract]:Discretion is an important power enjoyed by judges in judicial activities and a link between legal provisions and specific cases. The discretion of the judge can be divided into the discretion in the stage of fact determination and the discretion in the stage of application of law. These two stages are closely linked, the application of law is based on the fact of the premise, the fact of the right or not directly affect the fairness of the case. In the stage of fact determination, the judge should exercise his discretion in the distribution of burden of proof, the collection of evidence, the confirmation of evidence ability and the judgment of the power of proof. Through the exercise of discretion, the judge can form his inner conviction, complete the understanding of the facts of the case, and lay the foundation for the application of the law. Therefore, how to exercise discretion legally and reasonably is of great significance to the adjudication of cases. The lack of clear rules of operation and the lack of effective means of restriction in the determination of the facts of civil litigation in our country have opened the door for the abuse of discretion objectively. In view of the fact that the judge's discretion is objectively in disorder in our country, the author systematically expounds the theory of discretion, the distribution of burden of proof and the collection of evidence. This paper analyzes the discretion of the judge in several aspects of the determination of the power of proof, and discusses the regulatory measures of the discretion. On the basis of detailed analysis of discretion, the author draws lessons from the relevant regulations of foreign countries and puts forward some opinions on the basis of combining with the judicial practice of our country. The author hopes to provide some reference for the judge to exercise the discretion in standardizing the fact of civil action in our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D915.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 陳衛(wèi)東;付磊;;我國(guó)證據(jù)能力制度的反思與完善[J];證據(jù)科學(xué);2008年01期

2 王利明;民事證據(jù)規(guī)則司法解釋若干問(wèn)題研究[J];法學(xué);2004年01期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 李巖峰;法官自由裁量權(quán)論[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2007年

本文編號(hào)：2195403