文书提出义务的实践与反思——以劳动争议为视角

发布时间：2018-01-15 21:03

本文关键词：文书提出义务的实践与反思——以劳动争议为视角　出处：《当代法学》2015年02期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：从司法实务中的常见案例出发,可以发现本应适用文书提出义务来解决的案件,裁判者却不恰当的运用了证明责任裁判的方式。这种并非个案的情况说明司法实务对于"文书提出义务"这一民诉法概念还处于非常陌生的境地。这种义务实际上是指持有文书且不负证明责任的当事人或第三人,因举证人将该文书作为证据方法使用,而负有将其提出于受诉法院以便法院进行证据调查的诉讼法上的义务。尽管它与证明责任概念很容易被混淆,但实际上二者在性质与后果、主体与依据、目的与效果等方面均存在差异。以解释论的视角看来,我国民事诉讼法(包括劳动程序法)上并不缺乏文书提出义务的相关规范,但需要就这种义务的概念表达、适用范围、适用程序、法律责任等问题进行进一步的补充与完善。
[Abstract]:Starting from the common case in judicial practice, we find that this should apply the documentations submission obligation to resolve the case, the judge is not appropriate to use the proof of this is not the case. The case in judicial practice "document of obligation" concept of this law is still in a very strange situation. The duty actually refers to hold the document and do not assume the party or the third person of the burden of proof, because the instrument will give witness as evidence for the use of methods, will be provided for litigation evidence investigation by the court of appeal to the court on duty. Although it is very easy to confuse the concept of burden of proof, but in fact two the nature and consequences of the subject and the basis, purpose and effect are different. In order to explain the theory point of view, China's Civil Procedure Law (including labor process) is not the lack of documents. The relevant norms of the obligation, however, need to be further supplemented and perfected in terms of the concept expression, scope of application, application procedure, legal liability and so on.

【作者单位】：中南民族大学法学院;
【基金】：国家社科基金青年项目“合同法上的证明责任问题研究”(14CFX034)的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D926.13
【正文快照】： 引言文书提出义务,指持有文书且不负证明责任的当事人或第三人,因举证人将该文书作为证据方法使用,而负有将其提出于受诉法院以便法院进行证据调查的诉讼法上的义务。〔1〕这种义务在德国、日本和我国台湾地区的民事诉讼法中均有明文表述,但在我国民事诉讼法中却并非如此,由此

【共引文献】