我国民事证明责任分配规范问题再审思  

Thinking on the Distribution Norm of the Burden of Proof in China

作　　者：翁晓斌[1] 饶淑慧 Weng Xiaobin;Rao Shuhui(Zejiang University,Hangzhou 310013,China)

机构地区：[1]浙江大学光华法学院,浙江杭州310013

出　　处：《河南师范大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2021年第3期55-63,共9页Journal of Henan Normal University(Philosophy and Social Sciences)

摘　　要：规范说是民事实体法中证明责任分配规范配置的基本原则,我国民事立法中却未完全体现该原则。最新出台的《民法典》中,显性证明责任分配规范较以往有小幅增加;从规范说角度,我国民事实体法中的诸多问题依然未得到充分回应,条文间缺乏体系化的证明责任考量问题未得到实质性回应;证明责任提示语使用的规范程度仍有提升空间;规范说与消极事实的证明难题尚未厘清;两种证明责任表达方式的区分适用存在混乱,存在过多使用显性证明责任规定等问题。这些问题的形成由来已久,根本上是由我国民事实体法之“权利义务型”条文表述模式所致。短期只能以立法解释方式进行补充完善;长期而言,立法者须对民事实体法的条文表述方式进行深入、系统的考量。Chinese civil legislation has never fully elaborated the theory of classification of legal requirements,though it is reckoned as the basic principle when referred to allocate the burden of proof in civil substantive law.In the Civil Code,the explicit distribution norm of burden of proof is slightly increased compared with that in the past.From the viewpoint of the theory of classification of legal requirements,many problems in China's civil substantive law have not been fully responded.The lack of systematic consideration of burden of proof has not been substantively responded;There is still room for improvement in the standard degree of clues for the burden of proof;The difficulty of the theory of classification of legal requirements and the proving of negative facts is not clear yet;There is confusion in the distinct application of the two ways of expression of burden of proof;and there is too much use of explicit norm of burden of proof.These long-lasting unsolved problems should be fundamentally blamed on the expression mode of"rights and obligations"in the civil substantive law of our country.In the short term,it can only be supplemented and perfected by means of legislative interpretation;In the long run,the legislator should consider deeply and systematically the way of expressing the provisions of the civil substantive law.

关 键 词：民法典 证明责任分配 规范说 证明责任规范 

分 类 号：D925.113[政治法律—诉讼法学]