| The burden of proof,as the core issue of civil litigation,decides who will prove the evidence in the process of litigation and who will bear the risk when the truth of the facts is unknown.The burden of proof has been paid attention to over the years.Many scholars have conducted in-depth research on various aspects of the burden of proof,and the theoretical results are abundant.The relevant rules of the burden of proof have been constantly improved in our legislation.Nevertheless,some problems inevitably exist.This article takes the burden of proof in the validity of contract as the breakthrough point,starting from the case,finds that there are conflicting distribution results and confusing distribution basis in judicial practice.The first reason is that there is no clear distinction between the two concepts of contract validity.Secondly,it is due to the inconsistency between the specific rules of the distribution of burden of proof and the inaccuracy in grasping the essence of the burden of proof,the nature of the specific rules and their application in judicial practice.Thirdly,the substantive law of our country has certain influence on stipulating the elements of contract validity from both positive and negative aspects.On the basis of summarizing the above problems,this article focuses on combing and investigating the existing rules of burden of proof in China,combining with the normative theory and relevant foreign legislation,with a view to putting forward pertinent suggestions for amendment and improvement.Undoubtedly,this is not only of theoretical significance,but also of special value to judicial practice. |
