The Interpretation Of The Standard Of Proof For Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under The Circumstances Of Chinese Civil Litigation

On February 4th,2015,the supreme people's court issued and implemented “The Interpretations on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China”(hereinafter referred to as the Civil Procedure Interpretation),which stipulates in Article 109 : "If the parties prove the facts of fraud,coercion,malicious collaboration,as well as of nuncupative will and donation exist,then the fact shall be deemed as existence when the people's court is convinced that there's possibility of existence of such awaiting evidence can rule out the possibility of reasonable doubt." At present,there is no conclusive debate on the dispute over the interpretation of Article 109.However,debatable theory does not affect the application in practice.The author is judging a case which is a perfect example to explain the actual problem of applying Article 109.This case had already been through the following procedures: the claim was being dismissed in the first trial,the judge applied Article 108;in second trial,the judge applied Article 109,so part of the claim was supported;then in retrial,this case was vacated and remanded to the first Court.Now it's in second trial again.If not comprehensive understanding the standard of proof for beyond reasonable doubt in civil action,the appropriate application of Article 109 could be a dilemma for every judges,because of the vague facts and influential realities.Therefore,it is necessary to do research on the application of beyond reasonable doubt based on judicial practice.Case analysis,data statistics and comparative analysis methods are widely being used in this thesis.Through a sample analysis of some precedents before and after the application of Article 109 of the Civil Procedure Interpretation,the author makes a horizontal comparison with the relevant cases in criminal proceedings that applied the standard of proof for beyond reasonable doubt.Moreover,there is also demonstration about the standard of proof for reasonable doubt in both domestic and international civil actions.This thesis focuses on the relationship between the standard of proof for reasonable doubt and the standard of high probability in civil litigation from the perspective of judicial practice.According to trial experience and cognition of judge,conduct a comprehensive and in-depth analysis.First of all,based on the detailed introduction of the case and the application of the law,it leads to few questions: is the standard of proof for beyond a reasonable doubt in judicial practice a absolute or a relative standard? How to differentiate fraud,coercion,malicious collaboration,nuncupative will and donation etc.? What legal effect and social effect would cause after apply Article 109? Then,after selecting "reason" in the advanced search menu of China's Precedents Website and entering "beyond reasonable doubt",the author found that before government issued the draft of Civil Procedure Interpretation and seek for opinions from public in 2014,there's only few Judgements ever mentioned “beyond reasonable doubt”.However,ever since the formal implementation of the Civil Litigation in 2015,the frequency of Judgments,which mentioned "beyond reasonable doubt" has risen rapidly.In addition,as the drafters and enactors of Civil Procedure Interpretations.The applying proportion of “beyond reasonable doubt” in Supreme Court's judgement is much higher than other courts.As for Tibet Autonomous Region courts,they have remain silenced about the application of the standard of proof for beyond reasonable doubt in a neglected way.72.73% of the courts were cautious in the demonstration of beyond reasonable doubt,and 36.36% of the courts were extremly cautious.After that,30 precedents were randomly selected for analysis.According to the result of sampling analysis,the judges from the second instance and the retrial were more cautious about applying beyond reasonable doubt than the judges from the first instance.Besides,the proportion of applying Article 109 in the judicial practice is low,and mostly were only applicated in a implicit manner;to break through,extend or even reverse the application beyond reasonable doubt is arbitrary;there is a difference between the understanding of beyond reasonable doubt or high possibility and the third-level standard of proof that Civil Procedure Interpretation intending to constructed;How to and whether apply reasonable doubt or not,if so,how to unify the scale or apply the standard,these four situations are commonly exist in judicial practice.Reasonable doubt means the person who is in the neutral position,after fully analyzed,deliberated consider and even investigated,still having suspicion.The standard of proof for beyond reasonable doubt in civil litigation could vaguely defined as the person who with onus probandi have to prove that the fact he is claiming is extremely high enough to rule out reasonable doubt.The extent of facts that could applying this standard in civil lawsuit should be extended to the facts in criminal law and in the identification of identity.Beyond reasonable doubt should be ranked with high possibility and possible(there is reason to believe that),from high to low as three levels together,jointly build into a diversified standard system with Chinese characteristics.In order to promote the practical application and theoretical research ofbeyond reasonable doubt in civil litigation,the scope of facts that could apply beyond reasonable doubt should be amended as soon as possible,so did assemble guiding cases involving the application this standards,complete the construction of multiple standards for proof in civil litigation and develop multi-function intelligent trial-assist system.