| Work-related injury insurance involves the distribution of benefits and risksin the economy and society.It is a system that is closely related to the majority of workers and has strong practicality.The work-related injury identification procedure in the employee’s application for work-related injury insurance benefits is also an important part of the conflict of social interests,and there are many subdivision problems at the operational level.Among them,especially the evidence system of work-related injury identification is the key to the whole case.my country’s work-related injury identification evidence system has a limited scope of application,except that the employer denies the employee’s work-related injury identification application and the employer bears the burden of proof.There are many loopholes or defects in the evidence system for work-related injury identification,such as the specific allocation of the burden of proof,the standard of proof,the time limit for proof,etc.There are no systematic regulations.Therefore,in practice,there is no unified standard for the understanding and application of the evidence system,and there is a possibility of discretion in the process.According to the analysis of dozens of cases selected from the online judgment documents,it can be found that for the same case,there are two different orientations in the court’s use of evidence: one is to deal with the use of evidence at discretion according to the needs of the situation;the other It is to pursue procedural justice and strictly review the use of evidence in accordance with existing provisions.The above two directions either lead to the identification of work-related injuries as unpredictable as opening a blind box;or make the procedure idling,and the employee’s enjoyment of work-related injury insurance is far away.Because of the shortcomings of the above two orientations,in order to advocate the improvement of the evidence system legislation,the establishment of a fair and unified evidence system,and the promotion of substantive settlement of administrative disputes,the demonstration will be carried out from three perspectives.First,it analyzes the insufficiency of the existing burden of proof distribution,and proposes a reasonable sharing of the burden of proof;second,in terms of the standard of proof,it proposes that the identification of work-related injuries should adopt a unified standard of high probability of proof;Third,in terms of the time limit for producing evidence,the time limit for producing evidence applies to all parties.On the basis of the above analysis,this paper further puts forward three suggestions for improvement,such as the establishment of a diversified model in which the parties jointly share the burden of proof. |
