A Study Of The Time Limit For Adducing Evidence Of Civil Litigation System

With the enhanced legal consciousness of the citizens in our country, the number of admissibility of civil action in the three lawsuits continues to increase. Evidences in civil actions attract the attention of jurisprudential circle and juridical practice departments. But how and when to submit evidence, and how to identify has always been the research subject of jurisprudential circle. In December6,2001, the Supreme People’s Court issued "Several Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings". This provision was implemented on April1,2002. However these rules, after all, are only the highest judicial interpretation, and do not converge and have inconsistencies with the current“People’s Republic of China Civil Procedure Law" in relevant provisions. Although these provisions established the proof deadline system for the first time, the aim is to change“evidence made at any time" to "timely”. But the lad and imperfection of the system prevented the work of people’s court hearing civil cases from carrying out smoothly, and resulting in a lot of problems in the use of judicial practice. Seen from the perspective of judicial practice, the question of "Onus Probandi Deadline "must be legislated and concretized for the purpose of solving some deep-seated problems in the civil trial process, rationalizing the court between the parties, and guaranteeing the civil trail work carred out smoothly.Proof Deadline System was intended to improve the effectiveness of the proceedings, prompting the parties to submit evidence as soon as possible and to ensure the impartiality of the judicial process. However, due to the regulations and the"People’s Republic of China Civil Procedure Law" do not converge, but also the lack of supporting regulations and coupled with the imperfection of the provisions leading to endless problems in the judicial practice. This thesis will start from the connotation of Onus Probandi Deadline, take a comparative approach and illustrates the way of proof prescribed in china to analyze issues arising in judicial practice. Then analyzes from the legal and practical value of the "Proof Deadline". Goes on to list the United States, Germany, France and other countries about their current provisions of the "Proof Deadline" in their own countries and advantages, and study from them. Finally, this thesis will analyze the importance of "Proof Deadline" to procedural justice, and the introduction of compulsory litigation agency of lawyer, advance court procedure and the distribution system of people’s register court’s work, and put forward of my own vision.his article is divided into five parts.The first part is the interpretation of the reasonable connotation and it’s establishment in China;The second part analysises the value and significance of the establishment of the reasonable system;The third part introduce the similar reasonable systems in United States,Germany,Japan,and France;The fourth part Summaries seven reasons in the reasonable system used in judicial practice; In the last part,I put forward ideas for the reform and improvement of the reasonable system.In a word, this topic is for the lake of relevant system in the proof deadline field of the current civil trial work in our country, trying to build a assumption of the interaction of counsel system, advanced court procedure and other procedures of civil trial in the civil trial process. Looking forward to benefit civil trail practice.