司法认知规则研究

发布时间：2018-08-28 16:58

【摘要】：近年来我国学术界、立法界与实务界都越来越关注并致力于各项证据规则的研究,以期构建一套我国完善的证据规则体系。司法认知规则作为英美传统证据规则之一,是一项独立的证据规则,是职权干预证明责任承担的特殊规则,即凡属于法定司法认知范围内的事项,当事人无需举证、质证,由法官依职权或依当事人申请直接予以认定。这项证据规则是一种司法捷径,本身具有很强的研究价值,它是在保证不损害司法公正的前提下废除了形式上对证据的要求,理由是证据在实际上并不必要。从这一点可以看出,司法认知可以影响证明责任的分配,提高诉讼效率,节约司法资源。纵观我国的司法认知规则的情况,各项研究才刚刚起步,到目前我国的三大诉讼中尚无司法认知这一个概念,也没有相关的内容涉及到司法认知,只有最高人民法院和最高人民检察院颁布的相关司法解释被学者们认为是与司法认知相关的规定。这项规则的缺失一定程度上既不利于规范法官的职权范围与当事人的举证活动的有序进行,也不利于克服司法实践中存在的诉讼效率低下与司法资源严重不足的矛盾现象。本文立足于这一现状,以司法认知的基本问题为出发点,以司法认知的对象为侧重点,以司法认知的程序为手段,以我国司法认知规则的研究现状为切入点,以期为我国司法认知规则的构建和发展找到突破口。本文分为四个部分。总体是通过对司法认知规则的规范的各个部分进行阐述,从而得出如何构建司法规则的结论。第一部分为司法认知的概论,主要介绍司法认知的概念、特征、效力以及与其他概念的区分,从而对其有一个较为明晰的了解；第二部分为司法认知的对象,主要探究司法认知的范围有哪些；第三部分为司法认知的程序,探讨的主要目的是控制法官自由裁量权,从而有效保障当事人的诉讼权利的实现；第四部分是对如何在我国证据法中构建司法认知规则的探讨,这是本文的落脚点也是重点。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the academic, legislative and practical circles of our country have paid more and more attention to the study of the rules of evidence in order to construct a perfect system of the rules of evidence in our country. As one of the traditional evidence rules in Britain and America, the judicial notice rule is an independent evidence rule, which is a special rule of power intervention to bear the burden of proof, that is, the parties do not need to prove and cross-examine the matters falling within the scope of legal judicial notice. It shall be determined directly by the judge ex officio or upon the application of the parties. This rule of evidence is a kind of judicial shortcut, which has a strong research value. It abolishes the formal requirement of evidence on the premise of not harming judicial justice, on the grounds that evidence is not necessary in practice. From this, we can see that judicial notice can affect the distribution of burden of proof, improve the efficiency of litigation and save judicial resources. Looking at the situation of judicial notice rules in our country, all kinds of research have just started. To the present, there is no concept of judicial notice in the three major litigation in our country, and there is no related content related to judicial notice. Only the judicial interpretation issued by the Supreme people's Court and the Supreme people's Procuratorate is considered by scholars to be related to judicial notice. To a certain extent, the absence of this rule is not conducive to standardizing the jurisdiction of the judge and the orderly conduct of the parties' evidential activities, nor is it conducive to overcoming the contradiction between the inefficiency of litigation and the serious shortage of judicial resources in judicial practice. Based on the present situation, this paper takes the basic problems of judicial notice as the starting point, the object of judicial notice as the focal point, the procedure of judicial notice as the means, and the current research situation of the rules of judicial notice as the breakthrough point. In order to find a breakthrough for the construction and development of judicial notice rules in China. This paper is divided into four parts. In general, the conclusion of how to construct judicial rules is obtained by expounding each part of the norms of judicial notice rules. The first part is an overview of judicial notice, mainly introduces the concept of judicial notice, characteristics, effectiveness and the distinction from other concepts, so as to have a relatively clear understanding of it; the second part is the object of judicial notice. The third part is the procedure of judicial notice, the main purpose of the discussion is to control the discretion of the judge, so as to effectively guarantee the realization of the litigant's right of action. The fourth part discusses how to construct the rules of judicial notice in the evidence law of our country, which is also the focus of this paper.
【学位授予单位】：南京师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D916

【参考文献】