论我国民诉法中举证时限规定适用的若干问题——以民诉法的规定与相关司法解释的关系为视角

Several Issues Concerning the Appliance of Rules about Time Limit of Inducing Evidence to the Civil Procedure Law in China——From the Perspective of the Relationship between the Rules in the Civil Procedure Law and Relevant Judicial Explanations

《民事诉讼法》新增的有关举证时限的内容与《证据若干规定》和《举证时限规定的通知》中的相关内容存有一定程度的矛盾,即确定举证时限期间主体的范围相冲突,举证时限期间的长短不一致,举证时限适用的程序范围不协调,证据失权的适用标准宽严不统一。鉴于此,以《民事诉讼法》中举证时限制度的立法目的作为根本的评判标准,以《民事诉讼法》中举证时限的规定作为基本依据,以《证据若干规定》和《举证时限规定的通知》中的规定作为主要内容,从解释论的角度对它们做出梳理与评析,认为确定举证时限期间的主体应当是人民法院,举证时限的期间应当以三十日作为标准,举证时限适用于一审、二审和再审程序,严格适用证据失权的法律后果。

The newly formulated contents on time limit of inducing evidence in the Civil Procedure Law and the rele- vant contents in the Several Provisions on Evidence in Civil Proceedings and the Notice to Produce Evidence are contra- dictory to a certain extent. Namely, the scopes of subject during the established time limit of inducing evidence are contradictory; the lengths of evidence-inducing time limit are contradictory; the scopes of procedure applicable for ev- idence-inducing time limit are inharmonious and the degrees of strictness on appliance standard of evidence disqualifi- cation are inconsistent. Taking the purpose of legislation in the Civil Procedure Law as judging standard, the rules on evidence-inducing time limit in the Civil Procedure Law as basis, the rules in the Several Provisions on Evidence in Civil Proceedings and the Notice to Produce Evidence as content, this paper analyzes through the perspective of herme- neutics, and comes up with the conclusion： the defining subject of evidence-inducing time limit should be the court. The time limit of inducing evidence should set 30 days as the standard. The evidence-inducing time limit is applicable to first instance, second instance and retrial procedures. And evidence disqualification Should be strictly applied.