| In recent years, with the deepening of trial reforms in China, the proof burden on the adversaries has been accentuated as a means to improve working efficiency during court trial. The judges dominating the trial with unchecked power, as they used to in the old working model are no longer seen. During the civil trials, the theory of proof burden has been proposed while the proof burden on the adversaries emphasized. That is to say , the adversary of proof burden loses the trial if the necessary factors are not be clarified.Rosenberg's Rules theory holds that allocation of proof burden is the basis of" unapplicable rules" principle, namely , "unapplicable rules" principle is the mehtod to conduct trials when the necessary factors are not clarified on the basis of idea that" the legal effect in trial is closely related to the proof of main facts in substantial law". The judge can not apply this rule without moral-based certainty, namely all the important facts are proved. The result is" the judge does not apply the rule when he has no moral-based certainty about the nonexistence of main facts or when he has no moral-based certainty about the existence and nonexistence of ther main facts". This idea is used as method to solve the problem of unclarified facts, and has become the core of Rosenberg's Rules theory. When the rule theory is applied to some trials where the adversaries don't have equal amount of evidence, or have difficulty with proof, usally the proof burden is not fairly allocated, hence the verdict of a specific trial is unfair. It is against the purpose of law.Presently, the methods to solve the problem are limited to the area of proof burden allocation. Proof burden allocation involves domain such as substantial law and applicability of law. In civil procedure, the unequal distribution of evidence and difficulty of proof involve the domain of procedure law, so it is unwise to turn to substantial law for solution. And in trial practice, such efforts cannot solve the problems to the root. If we forcibly change the distribution of the necessary facts proof byway of legislation interpretation, it will obviously shake the foundation of the substantial law (such as rules about proof burden transfer in some special kinds of cases in the civil procedural evidencerules by our supreme court it does not help to solve conflicts, and may cause new unfair allocation of proof burden, even intensify the conflicts between the adversaries. 1The present writer, after substantial comparative studies and in-field investigation, finds that the resolution lies in the procedural law domain, namely, the solution to the problem is obtainable through explorations into the civil procedural proof standard. But the researches on the standard of proof are just at the initial stage, and relevant theories are unsystematic and shallow. Efforts have been directed to the introduction to the research results about Anglo-Saxon law system, while research about the basics theories on the civil procedural proof standard of the continental law is rather weak. It is believed that relevant studies should be based on the research fruits of the countries of continental law such as Germany and Japan, and the pilot research orientations, associated with the misunderstanding s and disadvantages in our civil procedural proof standard theories and legislation so as to start studies in this area, and finally provide our civil trial legislation and law application with theoretical basis.This thesis involves the following domains:I .Through illustrations of the basic theories of the proof standard, I point out that the there quite some areas where people have misunderstandings about the concept of proof standard that its theoretical studies. And in regard of the concept of proof standard, "proof degree" has double probability implication of proof standard and thesis to be proved. The probability of thesis to be proved has the same proof degree in proof and attest, but proof degree must meet the requirement of the two aspects: the proba...
|
PDF Full Text Request