On The Civil Action That Hinder Research

Our country "Certain Stipulations about Civil Litigation Evidence of Supreme People's Court" Article 75, which officially provides: "Some evidence proves that a party has the evidence to refuse to provide intentionally. If the opposing party advocates that the content of this evidence does not favor the evidence possessor. The court may estimate this position establishment." This article was revealed generally the spoliation of evidence in civil litigation by the educational world. The spoliation of evidence devotes in the solution many questions as a result of majority of evidence owned by one party. The results of forbidden the privately retaliation are the protection of asking for the judicial sentence and the sentence based on the evidence. The complete lawsuit activity includes two parties, one is the activity of the court confirming the fact, and then sentencing, the other one is the ability of the evidence by Litigants. The situation is that one party is far away the evidence, which creates the unequal of weapons between two parties. One party owned the evidence intentionally may destroy or hide a piece of evidence, which is common in the judicial practice. The spoliation of evidence has gone bad litigant's right of proving and the equal between them, so that the behavior needs to be penalized.The stipulation about the spoliation of evidence is coarse. Regardless of the theorists or the practical worlds, it does not have the unification understanding to this question. But the solution creates a lot of questions which are worth of discussion. In the aspect of the conditions of the spoliation of evidence, if the party who bears the burden of proof destroys or hides the evidence, the court should sentence in accordance with evidence instead of applying the stipulation about the spoliation of evidence. And an unpremeditated spoliation of evidence should be included. The results of the spoliation of evidence include the spoliation of the court finding the truth and the spoliation of the proving by the party who bears the burden of proof. The behavior objects to widespread evidence method, including witness testimony, the appraisal as well as the litigant states. In the aspect of legal foundation, it includes the balance of evidence burden in substantive law and the balance of evidence control in procedural law. The two are controlled by the honest credit principle and the obligation to give assistance. The determination about how the party which does not bear the burden of proof helps the opposing party to claim facts and to supply evidences is the key. In the aspect of the effect of the spoliation of evidence, the court should take free judgment, the switch of the burden of proof or simply mitigating the burden of proof as the result of the spoliation of evidence. In addition, because the preservation of evidence and the proposition of the copy clerk, which is stipulated by many countries have similar function in the aspect of avoiding unequal between two parties, and the discovery system confirms that the litigant has the universal right to receiving evidence, so the relationship between the spoliation of evidence and the related systems is worth paying attention. This article pays attention to the conformity of legislative technology and legislative goal inside the system of the spoliation of evidence, well distributing among the related systems, the engagement between the substantive law and procedural law as well as the actual results of legal application. The author will launch the discussion in view of the above question, includes three parties, the first one is the outline of the spoliation of evidence, the second one is the basic function and value of the system, the third one is the legal effect. The most important problems is to take typological analysis. The cases involve the lawsuit of parent-child, the product liability dispute, the medical dispute including and so on. There are not many cases about the spoliation of evidence in the practical worlds. In view of the fact that the multiplicity and complexity of the effect about the spoliation of evidence, the author suggested that the courts carry on the detailed explanation in the judicial practice based on the case situation to the spoliation of evidence. When the case accumulates a certain amount, the typological operation will becomes the reality. The typological operation is the method of achieving the multiplex the stability application of the spoliation of evidence.