民事诉讼优势证据规则的实证研究

Research on Regulation of Preponderant Evidence in Civil Action

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属院系:

法学院

作者:

周亿洲

导师:

李祖军

导师单位:

法学院

学位:

硕士

语种:

中文

关键词:

民事诉讼;证明标准;优势证据规则

摘要:

优势证据规则在司法实践中有着举足轻重的作用,这使得优势证据规则的问题历来便是司法研究领域的大热门,近年尤甚。优势证据规则问题是一道大题、一道热题,也是一道难题:就我国现行的优势证据规则是否合理恰当,诉讼法学界内众说纷纭、褒贬各异;与此同时,全国法学人士就我国应如何完善优势证据规则各抒己见。 本文试图从实证研究的角度分析优势证据规则,通过查阅并归纳司法实践中的大量案例,了解优势证据规则在我国的适用情况,并分析优势证据规则在具体适用中所存在的问题。本文在查阅案例及分析案例的基础上,提出了三点有利于更好地应用优势证据规则的建议,以期能为我国建立健全科学化的司法体系提供一点绵薄之力。 本文在结构上分为引言、正文、结束语,其中正文共计三个部分。 引言部分提到了《关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》中关于优势证据规则的相关规定,该规定明确了民事诉讼中的证明要求和证明标准。但就优势证据规则的提出,在支持者的推举之声背后,亦有不少反对者存在。究竟优势证据规则价值如何,民事诉讼实践中应用优势证据规则的情况反映怎样?本文在引言部分就以上问题之答案的揭晓埋下了伏笔。 正文第一部分是实证研究中案例情况及简略分析。该部分中提到,本文从法院、律所、书籍、网络中收集了大量案例,选取了其中10个最能反映优势证据规则在我国司法实践中的适用情况的案例进行阐述与分析。选择法院审判案例做研究,是因为在我国,民事诉讼证据规则的适用权在法院,法官对优势证据规则的理解和适用至关重要。而选择律师办理案件做研究,则是因为律师能从诉讼当事人的角度反映出他们是如何理解和运用优势证据规则的。本文所选的10个案例涉及借款纠纷、债务纠纷、货款纠纷、损害赔偿纠纷以及工程款纠纷,从各种不同的纠纷中浅析优势证据规则的适用情况。 正文第二部分的内容为实证研究中反映出的主要问题,这些问题的发现是建立在第一部分中对10个案例的归纳分析基础之上的。案例情况反映,优势证据规则是必要的,也是可行的,但还存在一些问题。这些问题包括法律职业者不能准确理解和掌握优势证据规则;法律职业者对适用优势证据规则应注意的相关问题考虑不全;法律职业者对适用优势证据规则的主导思想存在偏差。 在正文的第三部分中,本文冒昧地提出了3点建议,即组织法律职业者对优势证据规则的法制渊源和法制精神进行学习理解;重视《证据规定》的相关规则的配合适用;制定适用优势证据规则的实施细则,进一步完善优势证据规则。本文旨在希望这三点粗浅建议的提出能够更有利于民事诉讼优势证据规则正确实施。 结束语是本文最后一部分。该部分提到了优势证据规则之于民事诉讼,之于解决社会诸多矛盾的重要性。优势证据规则不仅是审判人员对案件事实进行认定的依据与约束,也是诉讼当事人进行诉讼活动的指南。我国建立健全更为科学化的民事诉讼机制的道路还很漫长,本文希望这样的实证研究信息能为各界人士对于优势证据规则进一步的深入研究提供一点参考。

学科:

诉讼法学

提交日期

2018-01-11

引用参考

周亿洲. 民事诉讼优势证据规则的实证研究[D]. 西南政法大学,2013.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 民事诉讼优势证据规则的实证研究
  • dc.title
  • Research on Regulation of Preponderant Evidence in Civil Action
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • 20110351021346
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 周亿洲
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 法学院
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 硕士
  • dc.contributor.childdegree
  • 法律硕士
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2013
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 李祖军
  • dc.contributor.advisorAffiliation
  • 法学院
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • 民事诉讼;;证明标准;;优势证据规则
  • dc.subject
  • Civil litigation;Standard of proof;Regulation of preponderant evidence
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 优势证据规则在司法实践中有着举足轻重的作用,这使得优势证据规则的问题历来便是司法研究领域的大热门,近年尤甚。优势证据规则问题是一道大题、一道热题,也是一道难题:就我国现行的优势证据规则是否合理恰当,诉讼法学界内众说纷纭、褒贬各异;与此同时,全国法学人士就我国应如何完善优势证据规则各抒己见。 本文试图从实证研究的角度分析优势证据规则,通过查阅并归纳司法实践中的大量案例,了解优势证据规则在我国的适用情况,并分析优势证据规则在具体适用中所存在的问题。本文在查阅案例及分析案例的基础上,提出了三点有利于更好地应用优势证据规则的建议,以期能为我国建立健全科学化的司法体系提供一点绵薄之力。 本文在结构上分为引言、正文、结束语,其中正文共计三个部分。 引言部分提到了《关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》中关于优势证据规则的相关规定,该规定明确了民事诉讼中的证明要求和证明标准。但就优势证据规则的提出,在支持者的推举之声背后,亦有不少反对者存在。究竟优势证据规则价值如何,民事诉讼实践中应用优势证据规则的情况反映怎样?本文在引言部分就以上问题之答案的揭晓埋下了伏笔。 正文第一部分是实证研究中案例情况及简略分析。该部分中提到,本文从法院、律所、书籍、网络中收集了大量案例,选取了其中10个最能反映优势证据规则在我国司法实践中的适用情况的案例进行阐述与分析。选择法院审判案例做研究,是因为在我国,民事诉讼证据规则的适用权在法院,法官对优势证据规则的理解和适用至关重要。而选择律师办理案件做研究,则是因为律师能从诉讼当事人的角度反映出他们是如何理解和运用优势证据规则的。本文所选的10个案例涉及借款纠纷、债务纠纷、货款纠纷、损害赔偿纠纷以及工程款纠纷,从各种不同的纠纷中浅析优势证据规则的适用情况。 正文第二部分的内容为实证研究中反映出的主要问题,这些问题的发现是建立在第一部分中对10个案例的归纳分析基础之上的。案例情况反映,优势证据规则是必要的,也是可行的,但还存在一些问题。这些问题包括法律职业者不能准确理解和掌握优势证据规则;法律职业者对适用优势证据规则应注意的相关问题考虑不全;法律职业者对适用优势证据规则的主导思想存在偏差。 在正文的第三部分中,本文冒昧地提出了3点建议,即组织法律职业者对优势证据规则的法制渊源和法制精神进行学习理解;重视《证据规定》的相关规则的配合适用;制定适用优势证据规则的实施细则,进一步完善优势证据规则。本文旨在希望这三点粗浅建议的提出能够更有利于民事诉讼优势证据规则正确实施。 结束语是本文最后一部分。该部分提到了优势证据规则之于民事诉讼,之于解决社会诸多矛盾的重要性。优势证据规则不仅是审判人员对案件事实进行认定的依据与约束,也是诉讼当事人进行诉讼活动的指南。我国建立健全更为科学化的民事诉讼机制的道路还很漫长,本文希望这样的实证研究信息能为各界人士对于优势证据规则进一步的深入研究提供一点参考。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • Regulation of preponderant evidence has important role in the judicial practice, whichmakes the regulation of preponderant evidence question always is the most popular in thefield of legal research, especially in recent years. Regulation of preponderant evidence’sproblem is a big topic, a hot topic, also is a difficult problem: is the advantage of our currentevidence rule is reasonable, appropriate procedure law educational world within differentopinions vary, praise or blame; At the same time, the legal person is how our country shouldperfect the advantage opinions and evidence rules. This article tries to analysis from the perspective of empirical research regulation ofpreponderant evidence, through consulting and the vast majority of cases in judicial practice,understand regulation of preponderant evidence applicable in our country, and analyze theregulation of preponderant evidence in the concrete application of the problems. In this articleon the basis of case and case analysis, put forward three is helpful for better applicationregulation of preponderant evidence suggestion, in order to establish a scientific legal systemto provide a little contribute to it. This article is divided into introduction, body and conclusion in the structure, in whichthe body a total of three parts. Introduction part mentioned in the provisions about the civil action evidence rules, therelevant provisions of the evidence about the advantages of the regulation has been clearabout the civil case in court certificate requirements and standards. But in the advantage, theevidence presented the rules behind supporters pushing voices, also there are many opponents.Exactly how value of regulation of preponderant evidence, application advantages in thepractice of civil action evidence rules reflect how? This article in the introduction part isannounced the answer of the seeds of the above questions. The body of the first part is the empirical study case situation and brief analysis. Asmentioned in this part, this article from the courts, law firms, books, collected a large numberof cases in the network, select one of the ten most can reflect regulation of preponderant evidence of the applicable situation in judicial practice in our country and analyzed in cases.And choose a lawyer to handle the case study, it is because lawyers can reflect from the Angleof litigant they is how to understand and use the advantages of evidence rules. This articleselected10cases involve borrowing disputes, debt disputes, payment disputes, and anydispute concerning compensation for damage, from a variety of different dispute analysesregulation of preponderant evidence applies. Text in the second part of content to reflect the main problems in the empirical research,the discovery of these problems is to set up in the first part based on inductive analysis of the10cases. Case situation reflects, regulation of preponderant evidence is necessary, it is alsopossible, but there are still some problems. These problems include the legal professionals cannot accurately understand and grasp regulation of preponderant evidence; Legal professionalsthere is a deviation of the dominant idea of regulation of preponderant evidence shall apply. In the third part of the text, this article puts forward Suggestions on the3points, take theliberty of the legal professionals in a planned way to advantage evidence rule of law originand law spirit in-depth study to understand; Formulate the detailed rules for theimplementation of advantage evidence rules shall apply to further perfect the advantageevidence rules. The purpose of this article is to hope this three shallow Suggestions proposedadvantage can be more conducive to civil litigation evidence rules correct implementation. The conclusion is the last part of this article. This part mentioned advantage of evidencerules in civil litigation, to solve the social importance of many contradictions. Regulation ofpreponderant evidence is not only identified on the basis of the judges of the case facts withconstraints, and guide to litigants litigation activities. Our country to establish a morescientific civil litigation mechanism, it is a long way: an empirical study of this paper hopethis information can help people from all walks of life to advantage evidence rules a littlereference for the further in-depth study.
  • dc.subject.discipline
  • D925.13
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2013-09-23
回到顶部