裁判中心主义的诉讼特征是以证据能力为基准并强化司法裁决权的终极性,面对行政公定力,作为裁判证据采信或排除除当事人举证外同样需要法官积极心证予以支持,进而完成裁判义务。在司法实践中,法院审理民事案件时常面临着行政规范以及由此生成的行为、事实直接或间接地成为定案依据并可能产生有碍司法公正的情形。法院作为裁判的正义化身,既要维持司法纯洁性,又须本着司法不破行政的原则进行处理,故在不予直接撤销或宣布其无效的前提下,通过证据采信的方式以“裁判不适用原则”将其排除,藉此矫正违法实现私益救助。鉴于国情,我国传统司法对行政公定力通常采取回避态度,在个案中虽有司法在先性但未形成制度化和体系化难以操作,故本文从实证角度考量,以裁判理论为基础对“裁判不适用”进行原则化构筑,旨在《民事诉讼法》修改时将其确立为基本指导原则。 The litigant’s litigation characteristic is based on the evidence ability and strengthens the ultimate nature of the judicial ruling power. Confronting with the administrative official power, it adopts the evidence of referee as the evidence collection or confirmation. In addition to the litigant’s testimony, it also needs the positive testimony of the judge to support it, . In judicial practice, courts often face administrative norms and the resulting acts when they hear civil cases, and the facts directly or indirectly become the basis of the verdict and may lead to the obstruction of judicial fairness. As the just incarnation of the referee, the court not only maintains judicial purity but must also deal with the principle of judicial administration without breaking the government. Therefore, on the premise of not directly canceling or announcing its invalidation, Applicable principle “to exclude it, so as to rectify the illegal realization of private benefits. In view of the actual conditions of our country, the traditional judicial administration of our country usually adopts the evasive attitude towards the administrative power, and although there is precedent in the case of judicature but it is not institutionalized and systematic, it is difficult to operate the traditional judicial system in our country. Therefore, based on the referee theory, Referee does not apply ”principle of construction, aimed at the“ Code of Civil Procedure ”to modify it as the basic guiding principles.