A Study On The Examination And Approval Of Civil Action Appraisal Opinion

The identification conclusion, as a special kind of evidence in our civil procedure law, has its own character, function as well as method of proof. With development of our society, fields that relating to civil actions are becoming more and more sophisticated. Once some specialty is involved, the identification conclusion becomes crucial to ascertaining the fact and dividing the liabilities. However, no other because of its professionalism, the realism is that the identification conclusion sometimes just takes places of ascertaining the fact and determines absolutely the adjudication. As how to perfect our proof system concerning the identification conclusion has arose more and more attention from the scholars and judicial practice.Considering the current situation of the courts’ability of substantive examination on forensic identification conclusions in practice, this article emphasizes that the core point in enhancing such ability is the judges’discretion by examining the value and functions of forensic identification conclusions in both contexts of domestic law and comparative law. Meanwhile, this article also tries to provide the subjective and objective paths of improving the judges’discretion in China through previous analysis and the writer’s practice experience.This article divides into three parts. The first part introduces the definition and evidential property of forensic identification conclusions. At the meantime, this part also gives a brief description on examining the forensic identification. In the second part, the writer uses a comparative method to reveal the differences and connections between the expert witness system in Anglo-American law and the forensic identification system in civil law. The third part is the key part of this article as it raises the application of judges’discretion in the context of examining forensic identification conclusions in contemporary China, since both the expert witness system in Anglo-American law and the forensic identification system in civil law have set the judges’ discretion as the core point.Finally, as this paper coincides with the amendment of the Civil Procedural Law and those correlative rules of evidence have been modified more or less, the author just set out his own argument no matter how many differentia have existed in the controversies about this amendment. It has to admit that some points presented in this article, for instance, the judges should improve their discretion while examining forensic identification conclusions, the standard of discretion should be various toward different kind of forensic identification, etc., are disputable due to the writer’s limited academic ability. The writer hereby welcomes all relevant discussions and comments to perfect the writer’s argument.