Font Size: a A A

Civil Proceedings Time Limit Of Evidence

Posted on:2008-05-12Degree:MasterType:Thesis
Country:ChinaCandidate:X L ZhangFull Text:PDF
GTID:2206360242472103Subject:Law
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
The Supreme People's Court promulgated on December 21, 2001, the Supreme People's Court Regulations on Civil Trial Evidence , thus established the system of time limit in providing evidence in our country's civil procedure. Out of the general theory of time limit in providing evidence, this article first tries to carry on an analysis and interpretation on the concept of time limit in providing evidence, to search for the theoretical basis and the legal nature, then researches and analyzes the main content and existing problems of our country's present system of time limit in providing evidence. This article draws lessons from relevant stipulations of civil procedure law out of some representative countries and our Taiwan region, finally puts forward own proposals on how to further consummated the time limit in providing evidence system in our country's civil procedure.The first part is to analyze the concept, theoretical basis and the nature of time limit in providing evidence system, to point out that the litigant has to deliver the evidence to the court just in the designated period. Otherwise he would lose the right of providing evidence. The time limit in providing evidence is not a concept in responsibility of providing evidence, but a system to limit the time in which the litigant has the right of providing evidence. The responsibility of providing evidence is one kind form of procedure risk assignment. The both are different and widely divergent. The time limit in providing evidence is based on the procedure efficiency principle, procedure stability principle, the honesty and credit principle, the procedure fairness principle as well as the form truthfulness principle.The second part is according to " the Supreme People's Court Regulations on Civil Trial Evidence ", summarizes the main content of our country's time limit in providing evidence of civil procedure, emphatically analyzes its existing flaw and deficiency, such as lack of the subordinate system, the consequence of loss of right to be too harsh as well as the existing contradiction and deficiency of the concrete system.The third part compares the American, German, French, Japanese time limit in providing evidence system as well as that out of our country's Taiwan region, points out that these countries with different legal systems all experienced a change period from providing evidence at any time to providing evidence at proper time. Their stipulations about time limit in providing evidence are relatively perfect and operational, almost in preparing procedure before trial, being connected with evidence showing system. It should not be restricted in the evidence, but also includes litigant's proposal. All this is beneficial to us to improve our time limit in providing evidence system.The fourth part, based on the three parts above, points out that the value goal of combining fairness and efficiency should be reached in consummating our country's time limit in providing evidence system. The beneficial nutrient of our country's judicial practice and off-shore lawmaking and justice should be absorbed. Out of standardization of law itself we put forward some ideas to further consummate our country's time limit in providing evidence system.
Keywords/Search Tags:the time limit in providing evidence, lose of right of providing evidence, justice on procedure
PDF Full Text Request
Related items