Study On The System Of Burden Of Proof Distribution

Burden of producing evidence distribution system is the major part of the burden of producing evidence system. The justice of whole civil litigation system is directly influenced by the fact whether the burden of producing evidence is rational or not. Therefore, the burden of producing evidence distribution system is the point in civil litigation. After the research work of the scholars of Anglo-American legal system and Continental legal system, the doctrines of these schools are formed. Some of these doctrines are adopted by many countries to set up the burden of producing evidence distribution system of there own nation. Meanwhile, they accelerate the burden of producing evidence distribution system to develop scientifically. Because the research on civil litigation and the burden of producing evidence distribution theory are sluggish and weak in our nation, the burden of producing evidence distribution system is not perfect. By means of doing research on the question, the writer attempts to improve the current condition on these systems concerned. The content of the article approximately consist of five parts: Part I: The meaning of the burden of producing evidence. The scholars of Anglo-American system offer two interpretation of it. One: the litigant enough to appraised by jury; the other one: in the last phase of the trial procedure, if the case that the party offer to be affirmed by the jury, the party have to be responsible for it, due the uncertainty of the factuality of the fact. The continental legal system divides the burden of producing evidence into two parts: subjective burden of producing evidence and objective burden of producing evidence. The law field in our nation has their own ideas about the burden of producing evidence, which is based on the understanding of the interpretations of the two schools. Part II: a comparison between the Continental law system and Anglo-American law system in respect of the burden of producing evidence distribution system. The burden of producing evidence distribution system has its origin in the Roman law. Among its various theories in the Continental law system, the suspended evidence classification theory and the legal essential component classification theory stay in a dominant position. Especially the legal essential component classification theory, represented by Rosenberg′s "normative theory" has long been adopted by courts in Germany, Japan and Chinese Taiwan regions. The 20th century witnessed the emergence of a multitude of theories within the Continental law system as a rectification of and a complement to the previous theories. According to the Anglo-American law system, the burden of producing evidence distribution can only be carried out in specific legal cases based on a synthesis of the key elements involved. Part III: The inner values, which the burden of producing evidence distribution strives for. Realizing the aim and values of the substantial law is primary value orientation of the evidence distribution, while ensuring the impartiality of the legal proceedings is its requirement. In modern lawsuits, lawsuit economy and efficiency are gradually becoming another value orientation of the burden evidence distribution. Part IV: Constructing our national burden of evidence distribution system The paper first presents a framework and a theoretical basis for our national burden of evidence distribution system. The paper holds that such a system should include general rule, specific rules and other relevant theories. In combination with a critical analysis of our present-day legislation, the paper explores the flaws and deficiencies of our legislation Part V: Put forward proposals for perfecting our national burden of evidence distribution system.