检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:张卫平[1]
机构地区:[1]清华大学法学院
出 处:《法学研究》2003年第4期60-69,共10页Chinese Journal of Law
摘 要:如何建构一个科学判断诉讼中当事人证明是否成立的标准 ,一直是人们所企望的。但基于标准的客观化、具体化的要求 ,要求获得一种抽象的、又依赖于法官主观认识的证明标准是不可能的 ,这种标准的建构只能是一种“乌托邦”式的空想。证明度的判定 ,只能是在某种理念和原则的指导下 ,依靠法官的良心和知识 ,根据案件的具体情况来把握。It has always been attractive to construct a standard to decide, in a proper way, whether or not the parties' proof can be accepted in litigation. Therefore, great efforts have been made by both scholars and practitioners to achieve this goal. The author, however, holds the opinion that finding such a standard is an impossible mission, because compared to the two general characteristics of a standard, concreteness and objectiveness, the standard of proof, if any, needs to be both abstract and based on judges' subjective understandings. Therefore, such a standard people are trying to find only exists in Utopia. The question of when the parties' proof should be accepted can only be answered by those judges, who, guided by certain notions and principles, act according to their consciousness and knowledge on a case-to-case basis.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.249