导　　师： 罗筱琦

学科专业： 0351

授予学位： 硕士

作　　者： ;

机构地区： 广东财经大学

摘　　要： 最高人民法院分别在2001年和2008年颁行了《关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》、《关于适用<关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定>中有关举证时限规定的通知》，以司法解释的形式对举证时限制度作出明确的规定。举证时限制度的设置使我国的民事证据制度从证据随时提出主义时代跨入到证据适时提出主义时代，对我国民事诉讼制度的改革与发展具有深远的意义，但制度内容存在的局限性、司法理念的相对滞后性以及配套制度的不完备等原因，导致举证时限制度在我国的司法实践运行中存在诸多困惑。2012年全国人民代表大会常务委员会颁布了《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》修正案，首次以立法的形式规定了举证时限制度。立法机构从如何确定举证时限、逾期举证的说明义务、逾期举证的法律后果等多方面对举证时限制度进行了规定，这对民事证据的效力改革具有深远影响。 举证时限制度的运用必须在平衡实体正义与程序正义、客观真实与法律真实之后才能做出理性的选择。本文正是以此为切入口，在立足我国司法实践的背景下，分析我国举证时限制度在立法、实践中存在的不足与缺陷，并尝试对制度弊端形成的原因进行解析，最后提出举证时限制度的改革路径，以期对我国举证时限制度的改革有所裨益。 除引言和结语外，正文由三部分组成，具体结构如下： 第一部分是我国举证时限制度存在的缺陷。此部分从三个方面入手分析我国举证时限制度存在的缺陷，这三个方面分别是制度存在的理论困惑、立法技术存在的问题、实践运行存在的困境。 第二部分是我国举证时限制度缺陷存在的成因剖析。该部分内容是在分析举证时限制度缺陷的基础上，尝试从诉讼环境层面的原因和举证时限制度本身层面的原因两个角度切入，进一步挖掘举证时限制度在我国受挫的原因。 第三部分是我国举证时限制度的改革路径。本章内容首先从合理确定举证期限、规范法官自由裁量权的行使机制、规制举证时限制度的救济程序等内容为切入口，从立法技术角度完善我国举证时限制度本身；然后从证据交换制度、举证释明指导制度、文书命令提出制度去完备与举证时限制度相关的配套制度。二者里外结合、相辅相成。 The Supreme People's Court promulgated the ''Regulations on Evidence in CivilProceedings'', and ''Notice on Time Limit on Adducing Evidence'', in the form of judicialinterpretation made clear provisions on the time limit for adducing evidence. The prooflimitation system is arranged in the civil litigation of our country from the evidence at anytime period into the evidence put forward era, has the profound significance to the reformand development of China's civil litigation system, but due to limitations of judicialphilosophy of judicial interpretation, the relative lag and supporting system is not completeand other reasons, resulting in the proof limitation system has many puzzles in judicialpractice. In2012,the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress promulgated the''PRC Civil Procedure Law'' amendment, for the first time in the form of legislation theprovisions of the proof limitation system. The legislature revised from the determination oftime limit for adducing evidence, proof obligations overdue overdue burden, legalconsequences and other aspects of the proof limitation system, this evidence of the civilevidence of the effectiveness of the far-reaching reforms. The proof limitation system must be in balance of substantive justice and proceduraljustice, objective reality and legal reality after making a rational choice. Based on China'sjudicial practice background, analyze the insufficiency and the flaw of our country presentsevidence the time limit system exists in the legislation, practice, and tries to reason on theformation of the abuse of the system is analyzed, and finally puts forward the reform path ofthe proof limitation system, so as to benefit the reform of our country presents evidence thetime limit system. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the text consists of three parts, theconcrete structure is as follows: The first part is the defects of the proof limitation system. This part from three aspectsafter analyzing defects of our present evidence the time limit system, three aspects are existsconfusion in theory, system existence question of legislative technique, practice dilemma. The second part is the analysis of defects presents evidence the time limit system of ourcountry. This part is based on the defect analysis of the proof limitation system on theexisting attempts, from the perspective of two reasons the system reason and the time limitfor adducing evidence level litigation environment itself, further explore the reasons theproof limitation system encounters the dilemma in China is what? The third part is the path of reform of the proof limitation system. This chapter firstlyto determine a reasonable time limit for adducing evidence, regulate the exercise of judicialdiscretion mechanism, regulation of the proof limitation system relief program to cut theentrance, from the angle of legislative technology to improve our proof limitation systemitself; then from the evidence exchange system related to the limit system, the burden ofproof interpretation guidance system, document command the system complete and proof.Two miles away, with each other.

关 键 词： 举证时限 审前准备程序 证据交换 证据失权

分 类 号： [D925.1]

领　　域： [政治法律] [政治法律]