我国民事诉讼中“新证据”认定标准之探究——当事人有过错逾期提交证据认定问题  

On the Identification Criteria of "New Evidence" in China's Civil Litigation——The Problem as to Whether the Evidence Submitted after the Due Date Because of the Parties' Fault Should be Identified as "New Evidence"

作　　者：王薇[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]武汉大学法学院,湖北武汉430072 [2]武汉市中级人民法院民事审判第一庭,湖北武汉430024

出　　处：《太原理工大学学报（社会科学版）》2013年第2期6-9,15,共5页Journal of Taiyuan University of Technology(Social Science Edition)

基　　金：2011年度湖北省教育厅人文社会科学研究项目"证据收集程序中的利益保护研究"(2011jyty029)

摘　　要：司法实践中,人们对当事人有过错逾期提交的证据是否应认定为"新证据"存在实体处理和程序适用上的困惑。这些困惑源于立法上对"新证据"的认定标准无法统一。立法层面对"新证据"的认定标准有四种,即"随时提出"标准、"过错排除"标准、"实体重大影响"标准和"故意或者重大过失排除"标准。总体而言,"实体重大影响"标准(辅以费用制裁)作为当前我国民事诉讼中当事人有过错逾期提交证据认定"新证据"的标准较为合适。In judicial practice,as for whether the evidence submitted after the due date because of the parties＇ fault should be identified as ＂new evidence＂,judges are confused about its entity processing and procedural application due to the fact that the identification criteria of ＂new evidence＂ in legislation can not be unified.At the legislative level,there are four standards for the identification of ＂new evidence＂.They are ＂anytime proposed＂ standard,＂fault exclusion＂ standard,＂significant impact of the entity＂ standard and ＂intentional misconduct or gross negligence exclusion＂ standard.In general,＂significant impact of the entity＂ standard supplemented by cost sanctions is more appropriate to the identification of ＂new evidence＂ in our present civil litigation.

关 键 词：过错 逾期 新证据 随时提出主义 适时提出主义 

分 类 号：D925.1[政治法律—诉讼法学]