主观抽象证明责任的内核边界与适用空间

The Core Boundary and Applicable Space of Subjective Abstraction of Burden of Proof

主观抽象证明责任本质在于要求当事人积极适时、全面完整地提供证据。未提供任何证据、提供证据有缺漏,都是违反主观抽象证明责任的表现。在我国立法规范与司法实务中,都有主观抽象证明责任的体现,只是从主观抽象证明责任视角解释问题的现象并不多见。主观抽象证明责任具有其内在的独立价值意义,其中一条即存在一个排除证据共通适用的重要公理。可证性审查正是一种契合主观抽象证明责任本质、保证证据调查必要性的案件处理技术,有利于保障主观抽象证明责任在实务中的运用空间。

The essence of the subjective abstract burden of proof is to require the parties to provide evidence in a timely, comprehensive and complete manner. Failure to provide any evidence or lack of evidence is a violation of the subjective and abstract burden of proof. In our country’s legislative norms and judicial practice, there are manifestations of subjective abstract burden of proof, but it is rare to explain the problem from the perspective of subjective abstract burden of proof. The subjective abstract burden of proof has its inherent independence value meaning, one of which is that there is an important axiom that excludes the common application of evidence. Provability review is a case handling technique that fits the essence of the subjective abstract burden of proof and guarantees the necessity of evidence investigation, which is beneficial to guarantee the application space of the subjective abstract burden of proof in practice.