| From the initial provision of Article 34 of the ‘Evidence Provisions’ in 2001,to the official entry into the law of Article 65 of the ‘Civil Procedure Law’ in 2012,and then to the specific interpretation of Articles 101 and 102 of the ‘Civil Procedure Law Interpretation’ in 2015,it reflects As a result,China’normative system for overdue evidence production has gradually changed from a strict system of loss of evidence to a moderate system of loss of evidence,and the conditions for the composition of the system of moderated loss of evidence have been more detailed.China’s regulatory mechanism for overdue production of evidence has the characteristics of being based on the existence of evidence loss,however,some scholars have combined the regulatory mechanism of overdue evidence with empirical research and believe that the current overdue evidence regulation has a phenomenon of divergence between legislation and practice.Based on the legal norm of overdue evidence production,sorting out the regulatory mechanism for overdue evidence production in judicial practice,we can see that our courts have exposed some problems in the trial of overdue evidence production.Review of overdue evidence,adjust the reasons for overdue evidence and improve the rule design of overdue evidence regulation,so as to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties,build a more scientific rule system and promote the efficient development of litigation procedures.The first part explains the theoretical basis of the regulation of overdue evidence.The regulation of overdue evidence production in civil litigation refers to the fact that the parties in civil litigation cases have violated the time limit for producing evidence if they fail to comply with a certain time limit.Firstly,it systematically interprets the purpose of the overdue proof regulation,and makes it clear that the construction of the regulation is based on ensuring the fairness of the procedure,improving the efficiency of litigation and implementing the principle of good faith;Secondly,the changing logic of China’s overdue production of evidence regulation has been sorted out,China’s attitude towards overdue evidence has evolved from strict evidence loss to moderate evidence loss,and then the basic system of the overdue evidence regulation mechanism has been changed--distinguish and analyze the power loss system and other systems,deeply understand the connection and difference between the systems,and lay the foundation for the following research;Finally,the reasons for China’s determination to provide evidence overdue are explained from three aspects.The second part studies the application of the overdue evidence regulatory mechanism in the judicial practice of Chinese courts.The promulgation of the Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law is the demarcation line of China’s detailed provisions on the consequences of overdue proof,that is,the promulgation of the judicial interpretation makes overdue evidence applicable to the consequences of loss of power,and specifically sanction measures such as admonitions,fines,and compensation for expenses.Since the promulgation of the Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law,my country has more detailed provisions on the legal consequences of overdue proof,that is,on the basis of evidence loss,detailed provisions on sanctions,fines,fees and other sanctions are specified.Therefore,this chapter takes the Interpretation on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China issued by the Supreme People’s Court of my country in 2015 as the dividing point,to examine the practical application of the relevant legal provisions and judicial interpretations of overdue evidence in judicial practice by Chinese courts in two time periods.When collecting sample cases,it mainly focuses on the judgment documents applicable to the relevant laws and regulations on overdue production of evidence,sorts out their review status,and integrates the practical characteristics of such cases in judicial practice,so as to show the actual operation status of the overdue evidence regulation mechanism.The third part studies some problems and reasons of the overdue proof regulation in judicial application based on the results of the previous part of the empirical investigation.Judging from the practical operation of the regulation on overdue production of evidence in civil litigation,the judicial application of the regulation on overdue production of evidence in my country is not very effective,and there is a phenomenon that the legislation of the regulation of overdue production of evidence is not compatible with the practical operation,highlighting the lack of procedures for the determination of overdue evidence,the confusion of the reasons for overdue evidence,and the falsification of the legal consequences of overdue evidence.The reasons for this include the incomplete procedural guarantee rules for overdue evidence regulation in China,the lack of the current judicial environment in China,and the low operability of overdue evidence regulation procedures.The fourth part puts forward the application path of optimizing the overdue evidence regulation in judicial practice.In this part,following the above,after summarizing the problems and reasons of the judicial application of the overdue proof regulation in civil litigation in China,it explores a more perfect application path for the regulation in judicial practice.In accordance with the judicial practice in which courts fail to hear judgments strictly in accordance with the law and its judicial interpretations,the trial of overdue proof cases is regulated.Strengthening norms from the theoretical basis of system construction,that is,attaching importance to the value of litigation,giving full play to the judge’s right to interpret,and adding procedures for reviewing overdue evidence,so that both parties can fully express their opinions on the legal consequences of overdue evidence applied by the court;from the perspective of the elements of overdue proof,introduce the elements of delay in litigation,limit the scope of overdue evidence related to basic facts,and then standardize the setting of elements of overdue evidence;from the perspective of improving the rules of overdue evidence production,the rules for applying damages to overdue evidence are detailed,the applicable rules for resetting fines and sanctions,and the channels for overdue evidence production regulations are broadened,so as to improve the program design of overdue evidence production. |
