A Study On Objectivity In Result-oriented Judgement

Result-oriented doctrine is a judgement model that determines the result at first and then finds law to support it,which can provide a method for hard case and benefit for stability and acceptability of judgements.However,what is the real acceptability is doubted,which would reduce the certainty of a judgement,and there ’s more,owing to its pursuit of consequences,the judgement would take a risk of legal instrumentalism.In the result-oriented judgement,they would develop into the deficiency of objectivity.Judgment objectivity requires judicial judges to rule out the differences from the subject’s attitude,emotions,positions,thinking styles,and experience.Therefore,it is necessary for us to find the evidence and concrete reflection of the lack of referee objectivity in the result-oriented judgement based on the judicial practice of our country,and then make targeted suggestions on the returning of objectivity.The first child custody case in surrogacy(hereinafter referred to as the surrogacy case)is the typical example of this problem in Chinese practice.It arises from the collision between the emerging medical technology and the traditional legal system.And it is a typical hard case and a real result-oriented judgement in which the judge determines final ownership of guardianship at first,and then seeks legal basis for this guardianship.In this process,the omission of objectivity in the result selection process and the expanded interpretation of "step-parents and children" are the concrete reflection of the lack of objectivity.The lack of referee objectivity caused by result-oriented doctrine may cause damage to judicial authority and even the idea of law ruling.Based on these two aspects,this thesis puts forward suggestions for the returning of referee’s objectivity in a result-oriented judgement.Firstly we should set up the theory about systematical result that can build consensus in judgement and meet the request of generalization.Furthermore,it is necessary to clarify the applicable occasions and limits of various consideration factors,establish a scientific prediction mechanism of result and make the result selection process public.At the same time,the construction of legal interpretation community and the establishment of interpretation standards can reduce the subjectivity in the process of legal interpretation.