摘要
现代型诉讼案件中,证据偏在问题日益凸显,负有举证责任的当事人往往面临无法有效取证的问题,导致其承担诉讼不利的后果。顺应实践需求,我国民事诉讼中赋予当事人多种申请取证的渠道,但各申请取证制度体现“各自为政”的碎片化问题,制度适用上无法贯通,而是相互独立和隔离,减损了申请取证制度的实践价值;体系化的缺位造成申请取证制度功能的竞合与挤压,与缓解取证难的制度目标相去甚远。证据提出命令具有立法和效率上的优势,扩张其适用主体至第三人的证据提出命令可以吸收证据调查令的功能,并成为一项统括性的民事证据收集制度。加之申请法院调查取证的兜底性设计,从而构建以扩张后的证据提出命令为优先,申请法院调查取证为补充的我国民事诉讼申请取证体系。
In modern litigation cases,the problem of evidence is increasingly prominent,and the parties with the burden of proof often face the problem that they cannot effectively obtain evidence,leading to the adverse consequences of litigation.In response to the needs of practice,the parties have a variety of channels to apply for evidence collection in civil litigation in China,but the system for evidence application reflects the fragmentation of“independent governance”,which the system cannot be applied,but mutual independence and isolation,reducing the practical value of the application evidence system;the competition and squeeze of the function of the application evidence system,which is far from the system's goal of alleviating the difficulty of obtaining evidence.The evidence order has the advantage of legislation and efficiency,expanding its applicable subject to the third party,which can absorb the function of evidence investigation order and further become a comprehensive civil evidence collection system.In addition,the application for the court investigation and evidence collection design,so as to build a civil litigation application evidence collection system with the expansion of evidence as the priority and the court investigation and evidence collection as the supplement.
作者
肖建国
商盾
Xiao Jianguo;Shang Dun
出处
《法学杂志》
CSSCI
北大核心
2024年第6期86-101,共16页
Law Science Magazine
基金
国家社科基金重大项目“中国特色公益诉讼现代化的理论创新与实现机制研究”(项目编号:23&ZD164)的阶段性成果。
关键词
民事诉讼
申请取证
证据提出命令
申请法院调查取证
civil litigation
apply for evidence
the evidence order
apply for court investigation and evidence collection
