The Civil Burden Of Proof System

The emergence of the burden of proof system in civil action stems from human limitations and human themselves recognize their own limitations increasingly day by day! Due to the one-way nature of the time, what has happened yesterday cannot be reappeared again today; also due to the limitations of human cognitive ability, not only the things happened yesterday cannot be completely reappeared today, even in the time when the things are happening, we can not see the whole picture of the things. This limitation and non-reproducibility is expressed in civil proceedings often cause that, for some of the facts we can both not prove they are real or not in the subsequent civil jurisdictions, namely the authenticity of the things are unknown. Especially for the judges who not see the process of the things, this situation is even more common. However, as the last patron saint of social justice, the court can not declare himself abandon the ruling and throw the controversy to the society or the individuals again. Nothing more than this puzzledom that the courts face, which led to the birth of the burden of proof system. Because the emergence of the unknown authenticity of the case facts in the civil proceedings is so frequent, so as a early setup system which standardize the judges how to judge, the burden of proof system will be the only crucial factor between victory and defeat when the authenticity of the case facts are unknown in a civil proceedings. Thus, both for theoretical research or judicial practice, the research of the civil burden of proof systems is so important that, it has attracted so much attentions from the judges, scholars and lawyers, and that it has become the "imperial system" in the research of civil actions. In the process of the birth of this "imperial system" and in the process of it become perfect day by day, so much intelligent minds are jumped in, so much different theoretics appeared and become more perfect day by day, but more and more people find that they can only be more closed to the perfect, but can never be it-their theoretics for the burden of proof system always exist some defects. It is precisely these shortcomings but cause more re-investment of minds in this area, so it was said: the tree of the research of the burden of proof system is evergreen! The late nineteenth century German procedural law master Rosenberg's "Normentheorie" is the most popular theory today, but history is still far from the end! Especially for China's researchers in the burden of proof system, we might just stand on the starting line.