摘要
实务中行政行为所认定事实经常会成为后续民诉中的待证事实,但长期以来法规范层面对于行政行为所认定事实在后诉效力之规定付之阙如,2020年11月最高人民法院施行的《知产证据规定》第6条首次明确了知识产权行政行为所认定事实在后诉中的相对免证效力。然而,该免证效之规定有待商榷,理由有二:一是知识产权行政行为所认定事实不具备成为免证事实之基本条件,二是免证效与行政行为公定力理论相冲突。知识产权行政行为所认定事实在后诉中应具证明效,这既符合行政行为公定力之理论内涵,亦有利于后诉案件事实的正确认定和当事人的程序权利保障。在证明效下,知识产权行政行为所认定事实在后诉中的性质是证据而非事实,其证据资格及证明力之评价属于后诉法官自由裁量之范畴。《知产证据规定》第6条本质上拓展了民事诉讼免证事实之范围,而该范围应被合理界定,特别警惕其不正当扩张,否则将会导致当事人之间举证责任配置失衡,损害程序主体之合法权益。
In judicial practice,the facts determined by administrative acts often become the facts to be proved in subsequent civil proceedings,however,for a long time,there has been few legal norms on the effectiveness of facts determined by administrative acts in later actions.In November 2020,Provisions on Evidence for Civil Actions on Intellectual Property Rights issued by the Supreme People’s Court clarified,for the first time,the effectiveness of relative exemption from evidence in the subsequent action of facts determined by administrative acts,in Article 6.Whereas,this provision of exemption is debatable for two reasons:Firstly,there is a lack of basic conditions to entitle these facts with the effectiveness of exemption from evidence.Secondly,this effectiveness goes against the theory of the determination of administrative acts.The facts determined by intellectual property administrative acts should have the effect of proof in subsequent lawsuits,which accords with connotation of the theory of the determination of administrative acts and benefits the correct identification of facts and the protection of procedural rights of the parties.Within the effect of proof,the nature of facts determined by administrative acts in later action is evidence rather than fact,whose qualification and probative force belongs to the discretion of the judge in subsequent civil proceedings.In essence,Article 6 expands the scope of evidence-free facts,which should be reasonably defined,and precautions are especially needed against its undue expansion,or it will lead to the imbalance of the burden of proof between the parties and do harm to the legal rights and interests of the subjects.
作者
张海燕
ZHANG Haiyan(Law School,Shandong University,Qingdao Shandong 266237,China)
出处
《法学论坛》
CSSCI
北大核心
2022年第3期60-70,共11页
Legal Forum
基金
2020年国家社科基金重大项目《国家治理体系中民事执行现代化研究》(20&ZD195)的阶段性成果。
关键词
行政行为所认定事实
已决事实
免证效
证明效
免证事实
facts determined by administrative acts
determined facts
effect of exemption from evidence
effect of proof
evidence-free facts
