事案解明义务背景下摸索证明的边界探究

The Boundary of Fishing Expedition under the Disclosure Obligation of Case Facts

伴随辩论主义法理的变迁,当事人与法院在民事诉讼程序中的任务与活动有所调整,主要体现为法院阐明义务与当事人诉讼促进义务的强化。为达致集中审理的目标,当事人在特定情形下对于案件事实、证据承担解明义务。不论该事实、证据是否有利于己,其均应予以陈述或提出。但是,这并非意味着一方当事人可以无限制地要求对方当事人解明案件事实。一方当事人在诉讼中提出抽象性或猜测性主张,欲通过证据调查结果获得信息或证据时,原则上不被允许。然而,举证人已经充分提供相关线索使其主张具有合理根据的,应当允许其在事案解明义务的范围内进行摸索证明。对方当事人应负事案解明义务的范围,在一定程度上反映了摸索证明的容许度及其边界限制。

With the change of adversary system,the tasks and activities of the parties and the courts in civil proceedings have been adjusted,which are mainly reflected in the strengthening of the court's clarification obligations and the litigation promotion obligations of the parties.In order to achieve the goal of centralized hearing,litigants are obliged to clarify the facts and evidence of the case under specific circumstances.Whether the facts and evidence are beneficial or not,they should be stated or presented.However,it does not mean that one party can unconditionally ask the other party to clarify the facts of the case.When a party raises abstract or speculative claims in civil procedure,it is not allowed in principle to obtain information or evidence through the results of the evidence investigation.However,in the situation that the party has provided sufficient clues to make the claim reasonable,he should be allowed to explore the evidence within the scope of the disclosure obligation of case facts.To a certain extent,the scope of the disclosure obligation of case facts of the adversary reflects the permission of fishing expedition and the limit of its boundary.