Research On The Regulation Mechanism Of Overdue Evidence In Civil Litigation In China

The regulatory mechanism for the late presentation of evidence in civil litigation is built on the principle of good faith,the obligation of litigation promotion and the self-responsibility of the parties.This mechanism contains the value pursuit of procedural justice,procedural stability and litigation efficiency.From the perspective of the evolution of the regulation mechanism,the regulation mechanism for the late presentation of evidence in civil litigation in China has gone through three stages: "evidence presentation at any time",strict loss of rights in civil evidence,and discretionary loss of rights in civil evidence.The operation of the regulation mechanism for overdue evidence in civil litigation in China can be investigated from two dimensions: the application of relevant regulatory provisions of overdue evidence and the specific situation of overdue evidence cases.When examining the judicial application of the law,it focuses on article 68 of the Civil Procedure Law,articles 101,102,385 and 386 of the Judicial Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law,and article 59 of the new Evidence Provisions;the judge analyzes and sorts out the sample from multiple angles,such as the parties entrusting professional lawyers and submitting the overdue evidence stage,the explanation of the overdue evidence reasons and the other objection,the judge’s reviewing the overdue evidence procedure,results and applicable sanctions,the judge’s reasoning of the judgment on the overdue evidence,and the appeal or retrial initiated on the grounds that the overdue evidence should have lost its rights.After an overall investigation of the judicial application of the law and the cases of overdue evidence,it is found that the regulatory mechanism for the late presentation of evidence in civil litigation in China has the problems of serious violations of the rules for the presentation of evidence by the lawyer,insufficient procedural safeguards for reviewing overdue evidence,and the fictitious and alienated application of the norms for the presentation of overdue evidence.The reasons for this lie in factors such as insufficient safeguards for pretrial procedures,the lack of important procedural rules for reviewing overdue evidence,the unreasonable setting of the constituent elements of the discretionary loss of power in the late presentation of evidence,the unreasonable activation of the sanction mechanism for the presentation of evidence overdue,and the insufficient guidance of judges on the interpretation of evidence,which have jointly led to the problem of poor effectiveness of the regulatory mechanism for the presentation of evidence after late.In this regard,the system should be improved by enriching the pretrial preparation procedures,improving the review mechanism for overdue evidence,clarifying and adjusting the constituent elements of discretionary loss of power in the presentation of overdue evidence,improving the sanction mechanism for the presentation of overdue evidence,and strengthening judges’ interpretation guidance on the presentation of evidence.