论强制型书证收集程序的竞合与选择  

On Competition and Selection of Compulsory Documentary Evidence Collection Procedures

作　　者：曹建军 Cao Jianjun

机构地区：[1]中央财经大学法学院

出　　处：《复印报刊资料（诉讼法学、司法制度）》2022年第12期100-113,共14页

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目“民法典实施与证明规范配套研究”(项目编号:21YJC820002)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：我国证据收集制度存在四类程序竞合,给当事人和法院对程序的选择与协调造成困境。实务中账簿凭证、鉴定材料、公文书证、核实材料等四类书证的职权命令模式更适宜替代为举证释明,法院依申请取证仍有独特的范围与优势,证据保全应限缩要件和效力以避免排斥温和的书证提出命令。依据程序与利益的差异性标准,程序竞合的经解方案除“优先型”“吸收型”外,还应完善“界定型”,以明确书证提出命令的非职权性、非一般性、非直接强制性的制度边界。Our evidence collection system has four types of competing procedures,causing difficulties for the parties and the court in the selection and coordination of procedures.In judicial practice,the four types of ex officio orders,including book vouchers,authentication materials,public documents and verification materials,are more suitable to be replaced by proof elucidation.The court still has unique scope and advantages in taking evidence on application.The evidence preservation should be limited in terms of elements and effects,to avoid the exclusion of moderate order for production of documents.According to difference of procedures and benefits,the solutions of procedural competition contain priority type,absorption type and boundary-defined type.The order for production of documents shall be equipped with systematic boundary including attributes of non-authority,non-general,and non-directmandatory.

关 键 词：程序竞合 程序选择 书证提出命令 职权取证 证据保全 

分 类 号：D925.1[政治法律—诉讼法学]