论文部分内容阅读
最高人民法院出台的《关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》(以下简称《证据规定》)对举证时限制度的规定较为宽泛,司法实践的操作中出现很多适用上的障碍。本文认为,要想走出举证时限制度司法适用中的困境,有必要先固定争点,进而固定证据。对于如何固定争点可以视案件的难易程度而定,同时为避免在固定证据中举证时限制度与证据交换制度的相互冲突,举证期限届满之日应与证据交换之日重合。司法实践中,需灵活掌握“何时限定举证期限”的问题,以促进举证时限制度更好的发挥其应有的价值和作用。
Several Provisions on Evidence in Civil Litigation (hereinafter referred to as “Evidence Rules”) promulgated by the Supreme People’s Court have provided for a broader scope of the system of time limits for making evidence and there are many obstacles in the operation of judicial practice. This paper argues that if we want to get out of the predicament in the judicial application of the time limit of proof, it is necessary to fix the dispute first and then fix the evidence. How to fix disputes can depend on the difficulty of the case, and to avoid the conflict between the time limit system and the system of evidence exchange in the fixed evidence, the date of the expiration of the proof period should coincide with the date of the exchange of evidence. In judicial practice, we need to flexibly grasp the issue of “when will the period of proof be restricted” so as to promote the system of proof of time limits to better exert its due value and effect.