在民事诉讼中,各当事人之间往往存着共通性争点,法官对于这些共通的争点问题可以适用证据共通原则进行同一的认定,但由于共通性争点的认定问题不仅仅发生于同一诉讼中,还可能存在于不同的前后两诉中,此时证据共通原则能否仍发挥其效用呢?故而本文对证据共通原则的理论展开探究,进而阐明民事审判中有限地引入争点效规则的必要性,以应对发生在不同两诉中有关共通性事实的认定问题,实现两者之间的制度对接。 In civil litigation, there is often a commonality dispute between the parties, and the judge can apply the common evidence common principle to these common issues. However, since the identification of the commonality dispute occurs not only in the same lawsuit, but also May exist in different before and after the two vices, when the common principle of evidence can still play its effectiveness? Therefore, this article explores the theory of evidence common principle, and then illustrates the necessity of the limited introduction of the rules of competing in civil trial to Coping with the cognizance of the fact about commonality that occurred in two separate cases and realizing the institutional connection between the two.