民事證據(jù)調(diào)查令制度探究
發(fā)布時間：2018-10-13 16:11
【摘要】：“以事實為依據(jù),以法律為準(zhǔn)繩”是民事訴訟的基本原則,人民法院據(jù)以做出裁判的事實，必須是有充分證據(jù)證明的事實。確實充分的證據(jù)是民事訴訟裁判的基礎(chǔ)。隨著民事審判方式改革的不斷深入，我國的民事審判模式由超職權(quán)主義模式向當(dāng)事人主義模式過渡，在2002年4月起實施的《最高人民法院關(guān)于民事訴訟證據(jù)的若干規(guī)定》更是明確規(guī)定了當(dāng)事人對自已提出的主張有責(zé)任提供證據(jù)加以證明，否則將承擔(dān)因舉證不能而敗訴的風(fēng)險。至此，法院不再是調(diào)查收集證據(jù)的主體，當(dāng)事人成為真正負(fù)責(zé)收集和提供證據(jù)的主體。 在當(dāng)事人主義模式下，不論是原告一方還是被告一方提出主張，都必須自行提供證據(jù)加以證明，如何充分行使調(diào)查取證權(quán)來收集訴訟所需的證據(jù)就顯得十分重要。然而，由于現(xiàn)行法律規(guī)則的缺失，當(dāng)事人的調(diào)查取證權(quán)沒有得到充分的保障，使法律真實總不能接近客觀真實。當(dāng)事人往往因舉證不力而承擔(dān)敗訴的風(fēng)險。因此，應(yīng)當(dāng)積極探索和創(chuàng)新更多的保障當(dāng)事人證明權(quán)實現(xiàn)的法律制度。 本文從保障當(dāng)事人證明權(quán)的角度出發(fā)，分析我國現(xiàn)行法律對民事案件調(diào)查取證方式規(guī)定的不足，提出構(gòu)建民事證據(jù)調(diào)查令制度的必要性和可行性。結(jié)合北京、上海、山東、河南、江蘇等地推行民事證據(jù)調(diào)查令制度的實踐，，歸納各地法院在實行民事證據(jù)調(diào)查令制度時所出現(xiàn)的問題。在借鑒和分析比較大陸法系和英美法系國家相關(guān)立法的基礎(chǔ)上，對構(gòu)建民事證據(jù)調(diào)查令制度提出自已的想法。 本文分為五章。第一章主要談及調(diào)查令制度的定義及特征。第二章分析我國實行民事證據(jù)調(diào)查令制度的背景。第三章以各地法院試行民事證據(jù)調(diào)查令制度的具體情況為基礎(chǔ)，分析調(diào)查令制度在試行中存在的問題。第四章借鑒和分析大陸法系國家和英美法系國家的相關(guān)制度。第五章談?wù)摌?gòu)建民事證據(jù)調(diào)查令制度的幾個具體內(nèi)容。
[Abstract]:"taking facts as the basis and the law as the yardstick" is the basic principle of civil action. The fact on which the people's court makes its judgment must be a fact with sufficient evidence to prove it. Solid and sufficient evidence is the basis of the judgment of civil action. With the deepening of the reform of the civil trial mode, the mode of civil trial in our country has changed from the mode of exceeding authority to the mode of party doctrine. In April 2002, the provisions of the Supreme people's Court on the evidence in civil proceedings clearly stipulated that the parties have the responsibility to provide evidence to prove their claims, otherwise they will bear the risk of losing the lawsuit because of the inability to prove the evidence. At this point, the court is no longer the subject of investigation and collection of evidence, and the parties are truly responsible for collecting and providing evidence. Under the mode of litigant doctrine, both the plaintiff and the defendant must provide evidence to prove it. It is very important to fully exercise the right to investigate and collect evidence. However, due to the lack of current legal rules, the right of the parties to investigate and collect evidence has not been fully protected, which makes the legal truth always not close to the objective truth. The litigants often bear the risk of losing the lawsuit because of the lack of proof. Therefore, we should actively explore and innovate more legal systems to guarantee the realization of the parties' right of proof. From the point of view of protecting the party's right of proof, this paper analyzes the deficiency of the current law of our country on the way of investigation and collection of evidence in civil cases, and puts forward the necessity and feasibility of constructing the system of investigation order of civil evidence. Combined with the practice of carrying out the civil evidence investigation order system in Beijing, Shanghai, Shandong, Henan, Jiangsu and other places, the problems existing in the implementation of the civil evidence investigation order system by local courts are summarized. Based on the analysis and comparison of the relevant legislation between the civil law system and the common law system, the author puts forward his own ideas on the construction of the civil evidence investigation order system. This paper is divided into five chapters. The first chapter mainly deals with the definition and characteristics of investigation order system. The second chapter analyzes the background of the civil evidence investigation order system in China. The third chapter analyzes the problems existing in the trial of the civil evidence investigation order system on the basis of the concrete situation of the trial of the civil evidence investigation order system in various local courts. The fourth chapter draws lessons from and analyzes the relevant systems of civil law countries and common law countries. The fifth chapter discusses the construction of civil evidence investigation order system of several specific content.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.13
本文編號：2269213
[Abstract]:"taking facts as the basis and the law as the yardstick" is the basic principle of civil action. The fact on which the people's court makes its judgment must be a fact with sufficient evidence to prove it. Solid and sufficient evidence is the basis of the judgment of civil action. With the deepening of the reform of the civil trial mode, the mode of civil trial in our country has changed from the mode of exceeding authority to the mode of party doctrine. In April 2002, the provisions of the Supreme people's Court on the evidence in civil proceedings clearly stipulated that the parties have the responsibility to provide evidence to prove their claims, otherwise they will bear the risk of losing the lawsuit because of the inability to prove the evidence. At this point, the court is no longer the subject of investigation and collection of evidence, and the parties are truly responsible for collecting and providing evidence. Under the mode of litigant doctrine, both the plaintiff and the defendant must provide evidence to prove it. It is very important to fully exercise the right to investigate and collect evidence. However, due to the lack of current legal rules, the right of the parties to investigate and collect evidence has not been fully protected, which makes the legal truth always not close to the objective truth. The litigants often bear the risk of losing the lawsuit because of the lack of proof. Therefore, we should actively explore and innovate more legal systems to guarantee the realization of the parties' right of proof. From the point of view of protecting the party's right of proof, this paper analyzes the deficiency of the current law of our country on the way of investigation and collection of evidence in civil cases, and puts forward the necessity and feasibility of constructing the system of investigation order of civil evidence. Combined with the practice of carrying out the civil evidence investigation order system in Beijing, Shanghai, Shandong, Henan, Jiangsu and other places, the problems existing in the implementation of the civil evidence investigation order system by local courts are summarized. Based on the analysis and comparison of the relevant legislation between the civil law system and the common law system, the author puts forward his own ideas on the construction of the civil evidence investigation order system. This paper is divided into five chapters. The first chapter mainly deals with the definition and characteristics of investigation order system. The second chapter analyzes the background of the civil evidence investigation order system in China. The third chapter analyzes the problems existing in the trial of the civil evidence investigation order system on the basis of the concrete situation of the trial of the civil evidence investigation order system in various local courts. The fourth chapter draws lessons from and analyzes the relevant systems of civil law countries and common law countries. The fifth chapter discusses the construction of civil evidence investigation order system of several specific content.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.13
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 宋平,嚴(yán)俊;“攻擊防御方法”之平衡——簡論民事證據(jù)調(diào)查令制度[J];重慶工商大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2005年05期
2 黎陳靨;;芻議民事訴訟證據(jù)調(diào)查令制度之建構(gòu)[J];大慶師范學(xué)院學(xué)報;2011年05期
3 湯嘯天;張進(jìn)德;江晨;梁玉超;;調(diào)查令制度的法律屬性與完善建議[J];法律適用;2008年07期
4 薛剛凌;行政授權(quán)與行政委托之探討[J];法學(xué)雜志;2002年03期
5 魏斌;論辯護(hù)律師調(diào)取有關(guān)材料權(quán)[J];中央政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報;1998年03期
6 錢雄偉;;律師調(diào)查令正當(dāng)性的法理思考[J];廣西青年干部學(xué)院學(xué)報;2006年04期
7 廖中洪;論中國民事證據(jù)發(fā)現(xiàn)制度的構(gòu)建——一個比較法視角的思考[J];金陵法律評論;2004年02期
8 繆苗;;完善民事證據(jù)調(diào)查令制度的設(shè)想[J];理論界;2006年05期
9 司春燕;淺析辯護(hù)律師的調(diào)查取證權(quán)[J];攀登;2002年06期
10 郭妍瓊;;論英美法系國家的民事訴訟證據(jù)收集制度[J];企業(yè)導(dǎo)報;2010年04期
相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條
1 程林;民事速裁機制研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2012年
本文編號：2269213
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/susongfa/2269213.html
