民事訴訟中的文書(shū)提出義務(wù)研究
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-09-01 11:31
【摘要】：對(duì)中國(guó)證據(jù)法草案進(jìn)行立法探討是中國(guó)民商法律科學(xué)研究中心的重要項(xiàng)目之一，專(zhuān)家通過(guò)對(duì)“民事證據(jù)規(guī)則”、“關(guān)于民事訴訟中的證據(jù)問(wèn)題若干規(guī)定意見(jiàn)”的調(diào)研，草擬證據(jù)法，從最近幾年的立法草案來(lái)看，許多專(zhuān)家學(xué)者都認(rèn)可了文書(shū)提出義務(wù)，都在自己的意見(jiàn)稿中提出來(lái)。2013年新《民事訴訟法》開(kāi)始施行，但是相比2007年的《民事訴訟法》，彌補(bǔ)了證據(jù)方面的一些不足，但是還是欠缺對(duì)當(dāng)事人證據(jù)收集的具體措施。 縱觀世界許多國(guó)家的訴訟法或證據(jù)法，文書(shū)作為一種獨(dú)立的證據(jù)方法，因其具有明確、直接和穩(wěn)定的特點(diǎn)，在證據(jù)中具有極其重要的地位，能夠直接證明案件事實(shí)�，F(xiàn)代社會(huì)科技文化不斷普及和發(fā)展，，文書(shū)成為民事行為最重要的記錄載體，成為民事訴訟中應(yīng)用最廣泛的證據(jù)形式。因此，為當(dāng)事人提供收集文書(shū)的程序保障,使當(dāng)事人能夠持有人手中收集到文書(shū)，確保審判的正當(dāng)性。本文基于文書(shū)在現(xiàn)代民事訴訟中所具有的優(yōu)勢(shì)，結(jié)合我國(guó)許多省份試行的調(diào)查令制度，主要從五個(gè)方面介紹文書(shū)提出義務(wù)： 第一部分主要是介紹文書(shū)提出義務(wù)的概述，文書(shū)是通過(guò)文字或其他符號(hào)表示某些思想或內(nèi)容的物件，當(dāng)其作為證據(jù)使用時(shí)，稱(chēng)其為書(shū)證，持有人在舉證人向法院申請(qǐng)要求提出文書(shū)時(shí)應(yīng)履行文書(shū)提出義務(wù)，基于武器平等的理論基礎(chǔ)，更好的保障當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)的權(quán)利，文書(shū)提出義務(wù)逐漸成為一般性的義務(wù)，提出范圍進(jìn)一步擴(kuò)大。 第二部分介紹文書(shū)提出義務(wù)的范圍，不負(fù)舉證責(zé)任的當(dāng)事人和持有文書(shū)并且負(fù)有文書(shū)提出義務(wù)的第三人作為主體，隨著時(shí)代環(huán)境的變化，立法體例亦不同，分別從列舉主義和概括主義兩個(gè)方面介紹應(yīng)提出文書(shū)的范圍，這種范圍應(yīng)該在衡量秘密保護(hù)利益和訴訟利益的基礎(chǔ)上加以限制，具體規(guī)定當(dāng)事人和第三人的除外事由，保護(hù)其秘密利益。 第三部分介紹文書(shū)提出義務(wù)的適用程序，舉證人以書(shū)面形式申請(qǐng)法院，并負(fù)有特定義務(wù)，保證持有人和法院清楚索要的文書(shū)，舉證人特定困難時(shí)，持有人有特定協(xié)助義務(wù)，幫助申請(qǐng)人特定文書(shū)，解決現(xiàn)代型民事訴訟中證據(jù)結(jié)構(gòu)偏在的情形。法院從形式審查到實(shí)質(zhì)審查，從一般審查到秘密審查，根據(jù)不同的情形或者駁回申請(qǐng)或者裁定當(dāng)事人和第三人提出文書(shū)，當(dāng)事人和第三人對(duì)判決不服，可以提出抗訴。 第四部分主要是介紹通過(guò)不同的制裁措施迫使當(dāng)事人和第三人履行文書(shū)提出義務(wù)，根據(jù)各個(gè)國(guó)家的相關(guān)規(guī)定，對(duì)當(dāng)事人主要采取訴訟上的不利益制裁措施，對(duì)第三人主要有四種制裁措施：經(jīng)濟(jì)制裁、強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行、訴訟和拘留。 第五部分根據(jù)前面四部分的介紹，結(jié)合我國(guó)關(guān)于證據(jù)方面的法規(guī)以及我國(guó)許多省份試行的調(diào)查令制度，在立法和司法實(shí)踐中，完善調(diào)查令制度，構(gòu)建我國(guó)的文書(shū)提出義務(wù)制度，保障當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)的手段，主要從四個(gè)方面引入，使文書(shū)提出義務(wù)法定化，在其基礎(chǔ)上從適用范圍、申請(qǐng)和審查裁決、第三人文書(shū)提出費(fèi)用請(qǐng)求權(quán)、制裁措施五個(gè)方面建構(gòu)我國(guó)的文書(shū)提出義務(wù)制度。
[Abstract]:Legislative discussion on the draft of China's evidence law is one of the important projects of China's Civil and Commercial Law Science Research Center. Through the investigation of "rules of civil evidence" and "opinions on certain provisions of evidence in civil litigation", experts draw up evidence law. Judging from the draft legislation in recent years, many experts and scholars have approved the article. In 2013, the new Civil Procedure Law came into effect, but compared with the 2007 Civil Procedure Law, it made up for some shortcomings in evidence, but still lacked specific measures to collect evidence for the parties.
Throughout the procedural law or evidence law of many countries in the world, documents, as an independent method of evidence, have an extremely important position in evidence because of their clear, direct and stable characteristics, and can directly prove the facts of a case. It is the most widely used form of evidence in civil litigation. Therefore, it provides procedural guarantee for the parties to collect documents so that the parties can hold the documents in their hands and ensure the justice of the trial. The five aspect introduces the obligation of instrument:
The first part mainly introduces the overview of the obligation of putting forward an instrument. An instrument is an object that expresses certain ideas or contents by words or other symbols. When it is used as evidence, it is called documentary evidence. The holder should fulfill the obligation of putting forward an instrument when applying to the court for putting forward an instrument. It is better based on the theory of equality of arms. To protect the right of the parties to collect evidence, the obligation to put forward documents has gradually become a general obligation, and the scope of the proposal has been further expanded.
The second part introduces the scope of the obligation of putting forward documents. The parties who do not bear the burden of proof and the third party who holds the obligation of putting forward documents are the main bodies. With the changes of the times and environment, the legislative styles are also different. The scope of the documents should be put forward from two aspects of enumeration and generalization, which should be balanced. Restrictions shall be imposed on the basis of measuring the interests of secret protection and litigation, specifying the exceptional reasons for the parties and third parties, and protecting their secret interests.
The third part introduces the application procedure of the obligation of putting forward documents. The evidencer applies to the court in written form and has a specific obligation to ensure that the holder and the court clearly request the documents. When the evidencer is in particular difficulties, the holder has a specific obligation to assist the applicant in specific documents and to solve the problem of the deviation of evidence structure in modern civil litigation. The court, from formal examination to substantive examination, from general examination to secret examination, may, under different circumstances, reject an application or order the parties and the third party to file an instrument. If the parties and the third party are not satisfied with the judgment, protest may be lodged.
The fourth part mainly introduces the different sanctions to force the parties and the third party to fulfill their obligations. According to the relevant provisions of various countries, the parties mainly take the unfavorable sanctions in litigation. There are four main sanctions against the third party: economic sanctions, compulsory enforcement, litigation and detention.
In the fifth part, according to the introduction of the first four parts, combined with the laws and regulations on evidence in China and the investigation order system in many provinces of China, we should perfect the investigation order system, construct the obligation system of document presentation, and ensure the parties to collect evidence, mainly from four aspects. On the basis of legalization of obligation, we should construct the system of obligation of document presentation in China from five aspects: scope of application, application and examination of adjudication, right to claim fees from third parties, and sanctions.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D925.1
本文編號(hào)：2217065
[Abstract]:Legislative discussion on the draft of China's evidence law is one of the important projects of China's Civil and Commercial Law Science Research Center. Through the investigation of "rules of civil evidence" and "opinions on certain provisions of evidence in civil litigation", experts draw up evidence law. Judging from the draft legislation in recent years, many experts and scholars have approved the article. In 2013, the new Civil Procedure Law came into effect, but compared with the 2007 Civil Procedure Law, it made up for some shortcomings in evidence, but still lacked specific measures to collect evidence for the parties.
Throughout the procedural law or evidence law of many countries in the world, documents, as an independent method of evidence, have an extremely important position in evidence because of their clear, direct and stable characteristics, and can directly prove the facts of a case. It is the most widely used form of evidence in civil litigation. Therefore, it provides procedural guarantee for the parties to collect documents so that the parties can hold the documents in their hands and ensure the justice of the trial. The five aspect introduces the obligation of instrument:
The first part mainly introduces the overview of the obligation of putting forward an instrument. An instrument is an object that expresses certain ideas or contents by words or other symbols. When it is used as evidence, it is called documentary evidence. The holder should fulfill the obligation of putting forward an instrument when applying to the court for putting forward an instrument. It is better based on the theory of equality of arms. To protect the right of the parties to collect evidence, the obligation to put forward documents has gradually become a general obligation, and the scope of the proposal has been further expanded.
The second part introduces the scope of the obligation of putting forward documents. The parties who do not bear the burden of proof and the third party who holds the obligation of putting forward documents are the main bodies. With the changes of the times and environment, the legislative styles are also different. The scope of the documents should be put forward from two aspects of enumeration and generalization, which should be balanced. Restrictions shall be imposed on the basis of measuring the interests of secret protection and litigation, specifying the exceptional reasons for the parties and third parties, and protecting their secret interests.
The third part introduces the application procedure of the obligation of putting forward documents. The evidencer applies to the court in written form and has a specific obligation to ensure that the holder and the court clearly request the documents. When the evidencer is in particular difficulties, the holder has a specific obligation to assist the applicant in specific documents and to solve the problem of the deviation of evidence structure in modern civil litigation. The court, from formal examination to substantive examination, from general examination to secret examination, may, under different circumstances, reject an application or order the parties and the third party to file an instrument. If the parties and the third party are not satisfied with the judgment, protest may be lodged.
The fourth part mainly introduces the different sanctions to force the parties and the third party to fulfill their obligations. According to the relevant provisions of various countries, the parties mainly take the unfavorable sanctions in litigation. There are four main sanctions against the third party: economic sanctions, compulsory enforcement, litigation and detention.
In the fifth part, according to the introduction of the first four parts, combined with the laws and regulations on evidence in China and the investigation order system in many provinces of China, we should perfect the investigation order system, construct the obligation system of document presentation, and ensure the parties to collect evidence, mainly from four aspects. On the basis of legalization of obligation, we should construct the system of obligation of document presentation in China from five aspects: scope of application, application and examination of adjudication, right to claim fees from third parties, and sanctions.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D925.1
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條
1 包冰鋒;;我國(guó)臺(tái)灣地區(qū)文書(shū)提出命令制度探討──兼論與日本相關(guān)制度比較[J];海峽法學(xué);2011年04期
2 占善剛;;第三人之文書(shū)提出義務(wù)初探[J];華中科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年03期
3 呼勇;書(shū)證的比較研究[J];寧夏社會(huì)科學(xué);2005年03期
4 包冰鋒;陶婷;;證據(jù)收集程序之保障:文書(shū)提出命令制度[J];南通大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年03期
5 占善剛;;論民事訴訟中的當(dāng)事人之文書(shū)提出義務(wù)[J];求索;2008年03期
6 熊躍敏;;日本民事訴訟的文書(shū)提出命令制度及其對(duì)我國(guó)的啟示[J];訴訟法論叢;2002年00期
7 奚瑋;余茂玉;;論證據(jù)共通原則在民事訴訟中的適用[J];山西師大學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2007年05期
8 包冰鋒;陶婷;;論文書(shū)提出命令中的秘密保護(hù)[J];西南民族大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社科版);2010年08期
9 占善剛;熊洋;;論第三人之文書(shū)提出義務(wù)及對(duì)我國(guó)立法的借鑒[J];證據(jù)學(xué)論壇;2007年02期
本文編號(hào)：2217065
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/susongfa/2217065.html
最近更新
教材專(zhuān)著
