Judicial Determination Of Restricted Self-admission

The Supreme People’s Court promulgated the newly revised Civil Evidence Provisions in December 2019.Among them,article 7 gave the people’s court the power to judge the effectiveness of restricted self-admission based on the situation of the case.Although the provision is flexible,it is not maneuverable and cannot give judges clear adjudication guidance.Misidentification of nature and erroneous determination of effectiveness often occur in practice.Restricted self-admission includes limited self-admission and conditional self-admission.Limited self-admission means that when one party admits the facts claimed by the other party,it additionally presents new facts for defense.It is expressed in the form of "admitted facts+ defense facts".Conditional self-admission means that when one party admits the facts claimed by the other party,it additionally presents other facts as a precondition.It is expressed in the form of "admitted facts + other facts".Due to the lack of objective judgment standards,different judges come to different verdicts when dealing with the same case.In fact,the separability of self-admission determines whether the restricted self-admission needs to be judged as a whole,and the rules of evidence fix the distribution of burden of proof of restricted self-admission.Judges can totally make a relatively objective judgement according to the different types of restricted self-admission when determine the effectiveness.For limited self-admissions,admitted facts and additional facts are not relevant.Therefore,the admitted facts don’t need to be proved and the additional facts need to be proved by the party who present the additional facts.For conditional self-admissions,admitted facts and additional facts are relevant.They must be judged as a whole.If the additional facts are admitted by opposite party,both of them will not need to be proved.If the additional facts are denied by opposite party,these facts are controversial and need to be proved by those who claimed them.The validity judgment of restricted self-admission is abstract.Through typological analysis,summarizing the specific characteristics and legal effects of different types of restricted self-restriction is conducive to improving the accuracy of type identification and validity determination.According to the different content of the additional fact,Limited self-admission can be divided into three situations.One is that the additional facts are the facts which can obstruct rights;The other is that the additional facts are the facts which can eliminate rights;The third is that the additional facts are the facts which can restrict rights.According to the different relationship between the additional facts and the case,Conditional self-admission can be divided into two situations.One is that the additional facts are the facts which are relevant to the case.The other is that the additional facts are the facts which are not relevant to the case.