法学家
  
   首页  |  期刊介绍  |  编 委 会  |  期刊订阅  |  投稿指南  |  广告服务  |  联系我们
法学家  2016, Issue (3): 31-44    DOI:
最新目录 | 下期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 Previous Articles  |  Next Articles  
当事人文书提出义务的制度建构
张卫平,天津大学卓越教授、清华大学法学院教授。
Institutional Construction of the Party's Duty of Producing Documents
Zhang Weiping, Professor of Tianjin University Law School,Professor of Tsinghua University Law School.
 全文: PDF (9731 KB)   HTML (1 KB)   输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      背景资料
摘要 我国民事诉讼中的文书提出义务,应采取限定主义。原则上应当以实体法上的文书提出请求权为依据。民事诉讼法可以作出必要的补充规定,允许诉讼中引用过的文书、利益文书和法律关系文书作为义务文书的范围,明确文书提出义务命令的申请和审查程序,强化不履行文书提出义务命令的法律后果。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入我的书架
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
张卫平
关键词民事诉讼   举证责任   书证   文书提出义务   案件解明义务     
Abstract: Documents, which belong to documentary evidence, play an important role in revealing facts in civil proceedings.But according to the principle of the party producing evidence and proving facts, while documents are in possession of the opposite party, the possessor is unwilling to put forward them and let the certifier get them because these documents may be detrimental to the possessor or the cost of producing documents is high.Thus evidence can not be discovered in debate procedure and judgment can not be made on the basis of enough facts.On the other hand, although the party possessing documents can be compelled to put forward documents by law from the idea of finding truth and achieving equity in litigation information, this method without restriction may damage many rights of the possessor, affect normal operation related to the processor's affairs, and deny the parties' burden of producing evidence.Therefore, the duty of producing documents must be limited and case specific in principle.Even though there are legal provisions about the duty of producing documentary evidence in the Interpretations on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law at present, express restrictive provisions are missing, and there also lacks corresponding procedure of application, trial, adjudication and relief, which influences the legitimacy and effectiveness of this institution's operation.This thesis carries out relatively detailed and indepth research on the basic framework, the scope of documents and procedural problems of the duty of producing documents.The research of this thesis is believed to have great reference value for the institutional construction and practice of the party's duty of producing documents in our country's civil action.
Key wordsCivil Procedure   Burden of Producing Evidence   Documentary Evidence   Duty of Producing Documents   Disclosure Obligation of Case   
引用本文:   
张卫平. 当事人文书提出义务的制度建构[J]. 法学家, 2016, (3): 31-44.
ZHANG Wei-Ping. Institutional Construction of the Party's Duty of Producing Documents[J]. , 2016, 1(3): 31-44.
 
相关文章:   
[1] 李浩. 不予再审“管辖错误”后遗留问题研究[J]. 法学家, 2017, 1(2): 128-137.
[2] 巢志雄. 民事诉权合同研究
        ——兼论我国司法裁判经验对法学理论发展的影响
[J]. 法学家, 2017, 1(1): 32-47.
[3] 张嘉军. 人民陪审制度:实证分析与制度重构[J]. 法学家, 2015, 1(6): 1-14.
[4] 吴泽勇. “正义标尺”还是“乌托邦”?
——比较视野中的民事诉讼证明标准
[J]. 法学家, 2014, 1(3): 145-162.
[5] 熊文聪. 商标合理使用:一个概念的检讨与澄清——以美国法的变迁为线索[J]. 法学家, 2013, 1(5): 148-163.
[6] 袁中华. 民事诉讼中文书真伪的“举证责任”问题[J]. 法学家, 2012, 1(6): 126-136.
[7] 张卫平. 民事诉讼中举证迟延的对策分析[J]. 法学家, 2012, 1(5): 104-114.
[8] 李浩. 民事诉讼管辖制度的新发展——对管辖修订的评析与研究[J]. 法学家, 2012, 1(4): 146-158.
[9] 江必新. 民事复审程序类型化研究[J]. 法学家, 2012, 1(2): 100-110.
[10] 胡学军. 从“抽象证明责任”到“具体举证责任” ——德、日民事证据法研究的实践转向及其对我国的启示[J]. 法学家, 2012, 1(2): 159-175.
[11] 孙邦清. 为何原告就被告?——关于地域管辖规则为谁而设之辨[J]. 法学家, 2011, 1(5): 148-154.
[12] 郭翔. 涉网案件地域管辖规则修改问题刍议[J]. 法学家, 2011, 1(5): 155-163.
[13] 郝振江. 论非讼程序在我国的重构[J]. 法学家, 2011, 1(4): 128-139.
[14] 李浩. 回归民事诉讼法——法院依职权调查取证的再改革[J]. 法学家, 2011, 1(3): 113-129.
[15] 刘加良. 民事诉讼调解模式研究[J]. 法学家, 2011, 1(2): 167-175.

版权所有 © 2011《法学家》编辑部 
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发 技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn