消极确认之诉的举证责任分配

On the Research of the Burden of Proof in Negative Confirmation Suit

消极确认之诉作为一种新型诉讼,在法院是否应当受理问题上正反两种观点互相博弈,举证责任如何分配并无明确的法律规定,实践中分配规则不统一。就理论而言,消极确认之诉举证责任如何分配具有双重困境,如被告承担举证责任将具有强制起诉机能,如原告承担举证责任将违反证据偏在规则。笔者通过分析2009年最高人民法院作出的案例,认为该裁判规则不可作为标准适用于所有消极确认之诉,指出原告败诉后果与传统诉讼的不同。在将诉讼作为系统工程的基础上,提出应当结合诉的利益防止诉权滥用,通过法官释明查清事实,慎用推定规则,巧用证明度标准,最终使消极确认之诉举证责任分配形成一套公平公正的体系。

Negative confirmation suit is a new type dispute. Whether the court should accept the suit is debated between pros and cons. Distribution of burden of proof has no clear legal requirement. In the practice of allocation rules are not uniform. In terms of theory, distribution of burden of proof of negative identification has a double dilemma. If the defendant bears the burden of proof, it will have a compulsory prosecution function. If the plaintiff bears the burden of proof, it will break the rule of evidence bias. The author, by analyzing the case made by the Supreme People＇s Court in 2009, considered that the rule of the referee is not applicable to all negative confirmations and pointed out that the result of the plaintiff losing is different from that of the traditional lawsuit in negative confirmations suit. On the basis of litigation as system engineering, the author put forward that we should prevent the interests of the lawsuit from the abuse of the right of appeal, and find out the facts by the judge＇s cohabitancy, carefully use presumptive rules and proof standards, resulting in forming a system of fairness and justice of the burden of proof in negative confirmation suit.