民事判决中的证据失权:案例与分析  

Evidence Disqualification in Civil Adjudication:A Case Analysis

作　　者：李浩[1] 

机构地区：[1]南京师范大学法学院,江苏南京210097

出　　处：《现代法学》2008年第5期113-122,共10页Modern Law Science

基　　金：司法部2006年度国家法治与法学理论研究项目"民事诉讼证据规则实施情况研究"(06SFB2036)

摘　　要：以证据失权为核心的举证时限是《证据规定》设立的一项新制度,也是其实施过程中遇到最大阻力的一项制度。我国法院的审判实务表明,在《证据规定》颁布之初,一些法院对逾期举证采取严格的失权措施,但随着时间的推移,法院对证据失权采取了越来越慎重的态度。当逾期举证的当事人并无故意或重大过失时;或会造成一方当事人实体权益的重大损失时;或会使裁判结果与实体公正严重冲突时,即使按照《证据规定》应当失权,法院也会做出不失权的选择。The limitation of production of evidence centering on evidence disqualification is a newly made provision in the Evidence Rules of the PRC, whose application seems in trouble. The practice of trials of the people＇ s courts in China reveals that at the very beginning when the Evidence Rules was enacted, some courts adopted a rigid line toward the evidence introduced after the prescribed time. However, as time went by, they began to take a cautious attitude to this matter. Where the party who introduced the evidence after the prescribed time did so without intention or material negligence, or where evidence disqualification will incur one party＇ s considerable loss of substantial interests, or where evidence disqualification will lead to a serious conflict of the judgment and the substantial justice, the courts tend not to make an evidence disqualification decision even when they might do so if in compliance with the provision of the Rules.

关 键 词：举证时限 证据失权 典型案例 适用变化 

分 类 号：D915.13[政治法律—诉讼法学] D925.1[政治法律—法学]