人们常常把对抗制和纠问制诉讼模式的不同作为西方两大法系最根本的不同点,进而依据两个模式又发现、列举出一系列衍生的区别。其中当然有正确的观点也有错误的理解。达马斯卡在本文中首先考察了自由放任时代两大法系所存在的相同点和不同点,进而跟踪之后两大法系发生的变化来甄别那些已经逐渐消失的区别,最终为我们揭示能够成为根本不同点的特征。 People often regard the differences between adversarial system and the mode of litigation as the most fundamental difference between the two legal systems in the West. Based on the two models, they also find out and enumerate a series of derivative differences. Of course, the correct viewpoints also have the wrong understanding. In this article, Damasca first examines the similarities and differences between the two legal systems in the era of laissez-faire, and then tracks the changes that have taken place in the two major legal systems to identify the differences that have gradually disappeared and finally reveals to us the fundamental Different characteristics.