论文部分内容阅读
2006年的彭宇案作为一起“道德官司”一度引起社会各界轰轰烈烈的争议和讨论。按照法理学家德沃金的理论,该案件的争议应当是关于事实的争议,并不是政治道德和忠实的双重争论。依据我国民事诉讼规则,在证明标准方面,法官判决依据的“社会情理”不符合“优势盖然性”的证明标准;在证明责任方面,在双方当事人都没有证据证明自己的主张的事实的真实性之时,原告方作为引起诉讼的一方,有责任证明自己主张的真实性,否则就会承担的败诉的后果。
Peng Yu 2006 as a case “moral court ” has aroused the vigorous debate and discussion in all walks of life. According to the jurisprudence of Dworkin’s theory, the controversy in the case should be a dispute over facts, not a double argument between political morality and faithfulness. According to the rules of civil procedure in China, in terms of the proof of proof, the criterion of “social reason” based on the judgment of the judge does not conform to the “superiority of the superiority”; in respect of the burden of proof, both parties have no evidence of the facts of their claim Of the authenticity of the time, the plaintiff as a party to cause a lawsuit, have the responsibility to prove the truth of their claims, otherwise they will bear the consequences of losing.