期刊文献+

我国亲子关系诉讼中推定规则适用之实践观察与反思 被引量:9

Practical Analysis and Rethink about Presumption Rules in Parenthood Litigation in China
下载PDF
导出
摘要 我国《婚姻法解释(三)》首次规定亲子关系诉讼中的推定规则,该规定结束了长期以来各界关于能否适用推定认定亲子关系的争论,将亲子关系诉讼中的事实推定上升为法律推定。然而,观察三年来亲子关系诉讼中推定规则的适用状况,发现裁判者对其适用范围、适用条件以及原告范围等问题理解不同,导致实践中同案不同判现象频现。对此,既要在理论层面使裁判者明确亲子关系诉讼中推定的逻辑结构和法律效果,正确处理推定与亲子鉴定在亲子关系认定问题上的适用关系并合理配置双方当事人的程序性权利义务;又要在民事立法层面建构完善的亲子关系推定及强制认领制度,保障亲子关系诉讼中推定规则的有效实施。 The Judicial Explanation III of Marriage Law stipulates the presumption rules of the parenthood litigation in China for the first time,which has put an end to the controversy that whether the presumption rules can be applied in parenthood litigation over a long period of time and has elevated factual presumption to legal presumption in parenthood litigation. However,after the three years' application of presumption rules in parenthood litigation,there exists a phenomenon that judges have different understandings towards some questions such as the application scope of presumption,the application conditions of presumption,the scope of the plaintiff and so on,which lead to different judgments for similar cases occurring frequently. In view of this,on the one hand,judges should definite the presumption's logical construction and legal effect to make sure the applied relationships between presumption and paternity testing on the issue of cognizance of parenthood can be correctly dealt with and the parties' procedural rights and obligations can be rationally allocated; on the other hand,perfect parenthood presumption regime and forcible claim regime should be constructed through civil legislation to guarantee the effective implementation of the presumption rules in parenthood litigation.
作者 张海燕
机构地区 山东大学法学院
出处 《政法论丛》 CSSCI 北大核心 2015年第1期111-119,共9页 Journal of Political Science and Law
基金 国家社科基金项目"实体法和程序法双重视角下的民事推定制度研究"(12BFX071)的阶段性成果
关键词 亲子关系诉讼 推定 亲子鉴定 原告范围 parenthood litigation presumption paternity test scope of the plaintiff
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

二级参考文献35

  • 1徐国栋.埃塞俄比亚民法典:两股改革热情碰撞的结晶[J].法律科学,2002,20(2):62-73. 被引量:14
  • 2李浩.事实真伪不明处置办法之比较[J].法商研究,2005,22(3):104-111. 被引量:29
  • 3裴苍龄.再论推定[J].法学研究,2006,28(3):119-127. 被引量:76
  • 4陈卫佐.德国民法典(第2版)[Z].北京:法律出版社,2006.
  • 5费安玲,等.意大利民法典[Z].北京:中国政法大学出版社.2004.
  • 6《埃塞俄比亚民法典》第758-761条.
  • 7《法国民法典》第312条.参见罗结珍译.法国民法典.北京:法律出版社,2005:280.
  • 8《德国民法典》第1592条.参见陈卫佐译注.德国民法典(第2版).北京:法律出版社,2006:493.
  • 9《法国民法典》第313-2条(参见罗结珍译.法国民法典[Z].北京:法律出版社,2005:283.).
  • 10《德国民法典》第1599条(参见陈卫佐译注.德国民法典(第2版)[Z].北京:法律出版社,2006:495.).

同被引文献200

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