期刊文献+

美国行政裁决程序中的传闻证据——一个历史维度的考察 被引量:1

The Hearsay Evidence in US Administrative Adjudications——from a historical perspective
原文传递
导出
摘要 在美国,存在着行政裁决程序和法院审判程序两类不同的程序。传统观点认为,行政裁决程序不受约束法庭事实认定者的审判证据规则的影响,尤其以传闻证据具有可采性为典型。随着美国行政程序的发展,传闻证据排除规则在美国行政程序法中逐渐兴起,使得行政程序证据规则和审判证据规则之间的关系发生了微妙变化。对两类证据规则之间关系的重新解读,将为我国行政程序证据规则的制定提供可借鉴的思路。 There are two different procedures in the United States: the administrative adjudication procedures and judicial proceedings.Generally believed that the administrative adjudication procedures were not affected by evidence rules of court that govern the fact-finder at trial,which especially the hearsay evidence in administrative proceedings is admissible as typical.About probable force of hearsay evidence,since the constraint of "residuum rule",hearsay evidence alone can not constitute substantial evidence.As the development of administrative procedures in the United States,the exclusion rule of hearsay evidence has gradually recovered in the US administrative procedure act,it makes the relationship between the evidence rules of administrative procedures and evidence rules of court subtly changed.Rethinking the relationship between two different evidence rules can provide reasonable ideas for formulating evidence rules of administrative procedures in China.
作者 冯俊伟 林华
出处 《证据科学》 2011年第4期437-444,共8页 Evidence Science
关键词 行政裁决 传闻证据 传闻排除 可采性 Administrative adjudication procedure Hearsay evidence Exclusion ofhearsay evidence Admissibility
  • 相关文献

参考文献46

  • 1杨锦炎.美国法上两种传闻定义的比较研究[J].证据科学,2008,16(3):291-304. 被引量:1
  • 2王明扬.美国行政法[M]中国法制出版社,1995.
  • 3Queen v.Hepburn. 7Cranch290 . 1813
  • 4Kenneth Culp Davis.Hearsay in Administrative Hearings. George Washington Law Review . 1963 -1964
  • 5Administrative Procedure in Government Agencies,Report of the Attorney General′s Committee on Administrative Procedure. . 1941
  • 6William H.Kuehnle.Standards of Evidence in Administrative Proceedings. New York Law School Law Review . 2004
  • 7ICC v.Baird. 194 U.S.25 . 1904
  • 8ICC v.Louisville&Nashville R.R.Co. 227 U.S.88 . 1913
  • 9Opp Cotton Mills,Inc.v.Admin′r. 312 U.S.126,155,61 S.Ct.524,85 L.Ed.624 . 1941
  • 10Francis H.Anderson.Administrative Evidence in New York:An Examination of Judicial Opinions. Albany Law Review . 1960

引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部