On Fact-Finding In The Court

The fact-finding of a case is the essential problem of a lawsuit. It requires that the judge should at first make clear what the fact is, what the fact of the case is, as well as how to acquire the truth corresponding to the case and the fact-finding of a case in the procedural justice. This is the frontier field of jurisprudence and procedural law and is also a controversial subject in the science of law.The fact-finding of a case is tightly associated with the viewpoint of epistemology, evidential value and jurisprudence. Different cognitive phases, cognitive rules and different evidential values are required to be embodied in different fact-findings of a case, thus resulting in different judgments. For epistemology, human beings are being understood as a combination of indefinite and finite characteristics. Thus, when one is recognizing a truth and ascertaining a fact, one is obliged to direct his attention to the truth itself and to acknowledge the characteristic of non-full-recovery of the past events. For evidential value, the requirement of the fact-finding of a case lies in the legitimacy, authenticity and relevancy of evidence, as well as the evidence requirements of the procedural justice. From the extrinsic point of view, evidence governs the constitution of the fact-finding of a case and to a certain extend recovers the fact itself. On the other hand, from the intrinsic point of view, the rationality, dignity and fairness shown by the evidence, procedurally guarantee the relative reasonableness of fact of a case. Diversity in legal cognition by different schools of jurisprudence resulted in inconsistent approaches adopted for the fact-finding of a case, subsequently leading to different judgments.The fact-finding of a case has its own principles and rules. Therefore it has a specific approach in ascertainment. There exist uncompromising conflicts between the fact-finding of a case and legislation. At present, the fact-finding of a case is inseparable from the principles of epistemology, formal logic rules and legal rules. Between fact and rule, one could adopt multifarious ways, multiple gateways to ascertain the fact of a case, thus solving the arduous problem faced during the fact-finding of a case. Generally, the fact of past event is recovered through reconstruction of evidence, presumption of judgment and life experiences in order to make it applicable in law. In the course of it, different attempts and approaches shall be carried out when carrying out the fact-finding of a case from the rational interpretation of law to the adoption of the hermeneutics of law, until a solution is reached.The ultimate direction of the fact-finding of a case is to solve the problems faced by law. Theoretically, the fact-finding of a case is able to reveal the truth of the fact, ascertain the principles and rules, thus to achieve relative fairness. Practically, it has the functions of helping the judges understand the concepts clearly, accelerating the judicial reformation of the country and renewing the judgment mode.This thesis makes some new exploration into the theoretical basis and approaches of fact-finding of a case. The creative point lies in firstly the analysis and evaluation of the concepts of fact-finding of a case and secondly the assessment of fact-finding of a case in different cognitive rules and different evidential values. It also probes into the problem that different schools of law have different viewpoints about law, thus resulting in different judgments in guiding the fact-finding of a case. In the final analysis, it also points out that fact-finding of a case demands various approaches, including the interpretation of law and the hermeneutics of law. In this way, the fact-finding of a case can be instructive for judges in judging cases. It can demonstrate social justice and be helpful in the reform of trial system in our country.