论文部分内容阅读
在审判实践中,我们发现有的法院在承办案件时,当事人按照办案人员的要求和有关法律规定提交了有关证据,而审判人员不给当事人出具收据,这种做法是与法相悖的。我国《民事诉讼法》第64条规定:“当事人对自己的主张,有责任提供证据。”第68条规定:“书证应当提交原件,物证应当提交原物。”如果当事人提交了有关证据而办案人员不给相应的收据,很容易引起争执。因为许多情况下,当事人提交给法院的原始证据是惟一的,如欠条、发票、合同书等,由于一些审判人员不出具收据,一旦发生丢失,往往争执不下,极易给当事人造成一定的损失,同时影响法院的执法形象。
In the trial practice, we found that some courts, when handling cases, submitted relevant evidence in accordance with the requirements of the investigators and the relevant laws and regulations, and the trial officers did not issue receipts to the parties. This is contrary to the law. Article 64 of the Code of Civil Procedure of our country stipulates: “The parties have the responsibility to provide evidence for their claims.” Article 68 states: “The documentary evidence shall be submitted in the original and the physical evidence shall be submitted to the original.” "If the parties have submitted Relevant evidence and investigators do not give the appropriate receipt, it is easy to cause a dispute. Because in many cases, the original evidence submitted by the parties to the court is unique, such as IOUs, invoices, contracts, etc. Since some judicial officers do not issue receipts, if there is a loss, they often can not win over the dispute and can easily cause some losses to the clients. At the same time affect the court’s image of law enforcement.