【作者】 蔡媛媛；

【导师】 郭春镇；

【作者基本信息】 厦门大学 ， 法律， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 事实推定是法官在诉讼过程中据情在自由心证范围内根据有关证据和经验法则对有关待证事实所作出的一种假定或推论。事实推定客观存在,它在民事诉讼中的作用是一般证据证明所不能替代的,但事实推定的适用却一直是法学界与司法实务工作者争议的焦点。法学界反对事实推定主要是认为其主观性强、稳定性差、且存在为法官堂而皇之地滥用自由裁量权提供合理依据之嫌。由于我国现行的民事诉讼法未有关于事实推定的内容,虽然最高人民法院1992年关于民事诉讼法的适用意见与2002年的证据规定对事实推定均有所涉及,但这些规定不仅未厘清事实推定与法律推定的关系,而且内容单薄,没有对事实推定的适用条件、法律效果、适用规则等涉及司法实践操作的重要问题作出明确规定。这种立法现状的缺陷与我国关于事实推定理论研究的薄弱导致司法实务中绝大多数法官对事实推定的适用持排斥、质疑、畏缩的态度,即便符合适用条件也因法律上没有明确规定而不敢大胆适用。然而从法官居中裁判的角度出发,在诉讼遭遇证明手段用尽、审理期限短暂、当事人权益又亟待保护的情形下,与其无视已经查实或确定的基础事实,无视当事人关于待证事实的主张,不如正视事实推定在缓解证明困难、提高诉讼效率、降低诉讼成本、维护社会公平正义等方面的作用,进而考虑从适用事实推定的原则设置、程序规范、配套制度建设等方面来严格事实推定的适用,克服法官主观因素的影响,降低适用风险,发挥事实推定在我国民事审判中的应有功能。更多还原

【Abstract】 Fact presumption is the presume or deduce which is applied by the Judge in the range of the freedom heart prove according to the case, some evidence or thumb rule during the trial .Fact presumption objectively existenced, whose function can not substituted by the common evidence in civil action, however, the application of the face presumption is the disputable focus between circle of the law and the operator of the justice practice all the time. The main reason for the opposition of the fact presumption in the circle of the law is that they take it highly subjectivity, bad stability, what’s more, it may suspiciously give the Judge opportunity of abusing freedom decision power. The current Civil Action Law has no content of fact presumption, although it has been somewhat stipulated in the application opinion of civil action law in 1992 and evidence stipulation in 2002 by the supreme court of people, these stipulations could not distinguish the relationship of the fact presumption and the law presumption, but also lack of content, because they don’t give any definite stipulation of important problems of the justice practice operation, such as the application condition, the law effect ,the application rule of the fact presumption. The defect of the current legislation and the weak theory research of the fact presumption result in most judges repulsing, oppugning, recoiling the application of the fact presumption during the trial practice. Even if it accords with the application condition, for there is no definite stipulation in law, they are not bold to apply the fact presumption.Whereas, as a Judge, when the lawsuit encounters the situation of no proved means, brevity of trial, desiderately protection of party of rights and interests. Regardless of the proved basic truth and the proposition from the party, it would be better to envisage the function of the fact presumption in alleviating the prove difficulty, enhancing the efficiency of lawsuit, reducing the cost of lawsuit, maintaining the society of equity and justice.Furthermore, in order to set the application condition strict, reduce the risk of application; we should take into account the construction of the rule setting of the fact presumption application, the procedure criterion, correlation system. We can exert the fact presumption its own function in our civil trial practice.更多还原