举证时限制度设置的目的应为确立与法定顺序主义相适应的“双阶型”审判流程。证据适时提出主义赋予了法官过大的裁量权,与设置我国举证时限制度的目的相去甚远。我国民事审判流程的革新本身是想朝着“双阶型”审判流程而去,却深受民法法系国家证据随时提出主义的影响,淡化了驱动“双阶型”审判流程的法定顺序主义,最终陷入“裁量陷阱”。《举证时限通知》的进步在于对法官在举证时限制度运行中过度裁量权的限缩。举证时限制度的合目的运行不仅需要程序技术的进步,更需要程序伦理的支撑与推动。《举证时限通知》的进步仅仅是程序技术方面的进步。 The purpose of establishing the time limit of proof should be to establish a “double-order” trial process that is compatible with legal orderism. The timely justification of evidence gives the judge too much discretion, which is far from the purpose of setting the time limit of proof in our country. The reform of the civil trial process in our country wants to go toward the trial process of “double order type”, but it is deeply influenced by the evidence of civil law and law country at any time, and dilutes the process of driving the trial of “double order type” Statutory sequence doctrine, eventually plunged into “discretionary trap ”. The advancement of the Notification of Time Limit for Proof lies in the reduction of the judge’s excessive discretion in the operation of the time limit of proof. Proof of time limit the scope of the operation not only need to improve the procedural technology, but also need to support and promote the program ethics. The advancement of the “Notice of Proof of Time” is only an improvement in procedural technology.