论文部分内容阅读
证明责任的分配是2012年《民事诉讼法》修改时被再度搁置而又有待解决的重大问题。罗森贝克的“规范说”严格依据法律条文的表述方式(条文结构)来分配证明责任。经由若干例证及拓展分析可发现,中国民事立法者很难说已经具备了按照“规范说”来设计法律条文的表述方式的自觉意识。因而,目前暂不宜将“规范说”作为我国民事证明责任分配的一般原则。将来若要奉“规范说”为一般原则,需要我国民法界的深度协力参与,尤其有赖于未来民法典的编纂者在设计法条表述时充分考虑证明责任的分配问题。
The distribution of burden of proof is a major issue to be rescheduled and yet to be resolved when the revision of the Code of Civil Procedure in 2012. Rosenbeck’s “specification ” in strict accordance with the provisions of the legal provisions (provisions of the structure) to prove the burden of proof. After a number of examples and expansion analyzes, it can be found that it is hard for Chinese civil lawmakers to say that they already have the awareness of how to design the legal provisions in terms of “rules and regulations.” Therefore, it is not appropriate at this moment to consider “standardization ” as the general principle of the distribution of civil burden of proof in our country. In the future, if we want to lay down “rules and regulations” as a general principle, we need the concerted participation of civil law circles in our country. In particular, it is necessary for compilers of civil codes in the future to fully consider the distribution of burden of proof when formulating the design law.