On The Parties Inquiry System In The Civil Procedure

Civil Procedure parties experienced disputes, their statements can provide first-hand information to help help judges find real cases.At the same time, the parties and the outcome of the proceedings have the most direct interest, the parties at the time of presenting its case to the court instinctively avoiding disadvantages, exaggerating the facts to their advantage, conceal or reduce their disadvantage in the fact that the party has been considered to be "the worst witness." The probative value of the statements of the parties and false statement is a contradiction.Civil law countries and regions have established a special investigation procedure to interrogate the parties since the 19 th century, aimed at ascertaining the facts.In February 4, 2015, the Supreme Court announced the "Supreme People's Court interpretation of <People's Republic of China Civil Procedure Law> on the application "(the following referred to as "judicial interpretation of Civil Procedure") Article 110 provides for the parties inquiry system, but humble judicial interpretation of the provisions are still many problems to be discussed.The body of this thesis consists of four parts:The first part is about the basic concepts and theories of he parties inquiry system.Coordinated statements by the parties and the parties inquiry system, is the starting point of this paper is the end result, this part of the article first questions the proposed instructions.In common law provisions, the parties appeared as a witness for questioning, and the parties inquiry system to the civil law is the parties themselves, as a testimony of Evidence approach.The former object is not discussed herein.The parties inquiry program elements include: people being asked is the party or his legal representative, the subject is the facts of the case, moreover start the program must have certain conditions.After examination of the parties are legally summoned by the court, the party bears scene obligations,true obligation and sworn obligation.The parties inquiry system,the parties hearing system and the witness inquiry system both connections and differences between two groups of concepts should be carefully distinguished.The second part is about extraterritorial law of the parties inquiry system, mainly on the relevant provisions of Germany, Japan and Taiwan of China.Interrogation rules and the legal consequences in terms of both provisions, Germany, Japan and Taiwan of China are similar.Start conditions are quite different, the German adhere to strict complementarity, Japan has eased, and China's Taiwan region is completely relaxed.Overall, the above-mentioned countries and regions provisions of the parties inquiry system are more comprehensive and detailed, it is worth our reference.The third part is our the parties inquiry system comment.The identity of the parties in civil proceedings, there are two, as the debate on the subject and as a means of proof, the corresponding statements by the parties were claims of the parties and evidence.The latter is regulated by the parties inquiry system. Address the plight of parties' statements as evidence of the parties inquiry system introduced background.On the one hand, China 's Civil Legislation aliasing two parties' statements and limit the parties' statements of probative force; In the judicial practice the parties' statements of evidence attribute confused with general debate is difficult to distinguish On the other hand. The parties to appear in court less or made the false statement resulted in evidence of statements by the parties significance utilization is very low. "Civil Procedure Law Judicial Interpretation" article 110 provides for the conditions to inquire the parties, sworn and the consequences of the party refused to accept inquiry.Which played for the probative value of statements by the parties has a positive meaning, but superficial provisions makes poor operability,and there are omissions. if the parties can start the process by application,lack of provisions on the ability to be inquired and sworn, there is no provisions of the consequences of which the party not holding the burden of evidence refused to accept the inquiry.The fourth part is to improve our parties inquiry system.First, start the program should adhere to the conditions complementary, except for preservation program;In order to protect the parties' right of proof, the parties should be allowed to ask the start the program by application.And the parties do not have full civil capacity can also be allowed.Secondly, the court can inquire multiple parties separately, if necessary, may request that the parties to confront witnesses.Finally, the judge may fine the party making false statements; the party not holding the burden of evidence refuses to accept cause the spoliation of evidence.