论民事诉讼中鉴定意见的证据效力

发布时间：2018-01-08 00:23

本文关键词：论民事诉讼中鉴定意见的证据效力　出处：《吉林大学》2015年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：鉴定意见作为我国民事诉讼八种法定证据之一,通过对案件中专门性问题的解决,来帮助法官及时正确的分析认定案件的事实,是法官认定案件事实的依据,对认定案件事实发挥着重要的作用,鉴定意见在诉讼过程中拥有着重要意义。随着2012年新《民事诉讼法》的修改,进一步扩大了当事人对鉴定启动的申请权,充分保障了当事人的诉讼权利,将鉴定结论改为鉴定意见,更加突出了其证据属性,规定了鉴定人出庭作证制度,加重了鉴定人的责任,增设了专家辅助人制度,实现了当事人双方的平等对抗。虽然我国民事诉讼法中有关鉴定制度的规定正日趋完善,在诉讼过程中也发挥着越来越重要的作用。但我们同时也应当看到,鉴定意见虽然是民事诉讼中经常使用的一种证据,但在司法实践中对于鉴定意见的运用存在很多问题,现有法律有关鉴定意见的规定仍然不能满足司法实践的需要。本文以《民事诉讼法》及相关法律规定为基础,运用历史和比较的分析方法,在借鉴英美法系和大陆法系相关规定的基础上,探究不同国家对鉴定意见证据效力的不同规定,从中吸取合理成分,来发现我国现有鉴定制度的不完善之处,进而提出相应的解决方案。首先通过两大法系鉴定启动程序的比较,从中发现各自的优势和弊端,在吸取和借鉴的基础上,重点分析我国鉴定启动程序,在对鉴定启动程序对证据效力的影响进行分析基础上,发现我国鉴定启动设置的缺陷与不足并提出我国鉴定启动权设置的完善建议,逐步限缩法院权力,排除对当事人诉权的不当干预。在启动程序上应当充分尊重当事人的意愿,赋予当事人救济权,最大限度保障当事人的权利。其次是对鉴定意见质证程序的分析,通过大陆法系和英美法系鉴定意见质证程序的分析,从证据的客观性、关联性和合法性三方面重点对我国鉴定意见的质证程序进行了分析。通过两大法系专家证据可采性问题规定的比较分析,对我国鉴定意见证据效力规定进行分析,从鉴定意见的真实性、关联性和合法性三方面对鉴定意见的证据效力进行审查。在分析我国法律对鉴定意见证据效力方面的规定明显缺失的基础上,提出完善鉴定意见证据效力规定的建议,探讨确立鉴定意见证据效力认定规则,通过鉴定意见认定和采纳制度的完善,规范法官对鉴定意见证据效力审查和认证规则,确保法官自由心证的公开,完善我国鉴定意见证据效力的规定,通过鉴定意见证据效力的确认来达到实现实体公正的作用,从而实现民事诉讼对效率价值的追求。新《民事诉讼法》虽然对鉴定人出庭作证义务作出规定,明确其拒不出庭的法律后果,但实践中鉴定人不出庭几乎是惯例,通过鉴定人不出庭对证据效力的影响分析基础上,提出鉴定人出庭制度完善构想,建立灵活的鉴定人出庭制度,采取多样的出庭方式,健全鉴定人出庭的司法保障制度,即保证了双方当事人的质证权,又兼顾了公平和效率的司法理念。针对新设立的专家辅助人制度的缺失,提出完善专家辅助人制度的建议,为法官具体审理案件提供依据和借鉴。最后由于我国法律对自行鉴定意见的证据效力如何规定存在空白,司法实践中不同的法院对自行鉴定意见所持的态度也不尽相同,为了更好发挥自行鉴定解决纠纷的作用,对如何使自行鉴定合法化和如何认定当事人的自行鉴定意见进行了阐述,为构建合理的当事人自行鉴定制度提供帮助。
[Abstract]:Expert opinion as China's civil eight kinds of legal evidence, through solving the case of specialized problems, to help the judge correctly identified the facts of the case, the judge is the basis for finding the facts, plays an important role in the facts of the case, the expert opinion has important significance in the process of litigation. With the 2012 new "Civil Procedure Law > changes, to further expand the parties to the identification start right to apply to fully protect the legal rights of the parties, the appraisal conclusion to the expert opinion, highlights the evidence attribute, the provisions of the expert testimony system, increase the appraiser responsibility, added the expert assistant system, realize the equality against both parties. Although the provisions on the identification system in our civil procedure law is becoming more perfect, in the process of litigation also plays a more and more An important role. But we should also see that although the expert opinion is a kind of evidence is often used in civil litigation, but in judicial practice for the use of expert opinion has many problems, the relevant provisions of the existing law expert opinion still cannot meet the needs of judicial practice. This paper is based on the "Civil Procedure Law" and the relevant laws, through historical and comparative analysis method, on the basis of common law and civil law the relevant provisions on the different provisions of different countries on the expert opinion evidence, learn from the reasonable points, to discover China's existing identification system is not perfect, and then put forward the corresponding solution first. By comparing the two legal identification program, found each advantages and disadvantages from, based on lessons and experiences, focuses on the analysis of starting program in China in the identification. Identification of impact on evidence for the effectiveness of the program on the basis of the analysis, found the defects and shortcomings of our identification settings and make our identification start right setting suggestions, gradually limit the powers of the court, to exclude improper intervention on the parties to appeal. In the startup programs should fully respect the wishes of the parties, giving the parties the right to relief, to maximize the protection of the rights of the parties. The second is the analysis of the expert opinion evidence procedure, through the analysis of the civil law and common law expert opinion evidence procedure, the objectivity of evidence, focus on quality certification procedures of our expert opinion of the three aspects of relevance and legitimacy are analyzed. Comparison and analysis of mining problems the provisions of the two legal systems expert evidence, expert opinion on China's evidence analysis, from the authenticity of expert opinion, relevance and legitimacy of the three aspects The effectiveness of expert opinion evidence review. In the analysis of China's laws on the basis of the expert opinion evidence of the effectiveness of the proposed regulations obviously missing, perfecting the expert opinion evidence of the effect of the provisions of the proposal, discussion on the establishment of validity rules of expert opinion evidence, and perfect the system of expert opinion by identified and adopted the standard of expert opinion evidence review of the validity of the judge and certification rules, to ensure the free evaluation of evidence disclosure, perfecting the expert opinion evidence rules, to achieve the role of substantive justice through the expert opinion to confirm the validity of evidence in civil litigation, so as to realize the pursuit of efficiency value. The new "Civil Procedure Law > although testify obligations of appraiser, clear it does not appear the legal consequences, but the identification of human practice is almost not to appear in court practice, through the identification of people does not appear to affect the validity of evidence points Based on the analysis, put forward to establish expert system perfection, identification of flexible court system, to take a variety of ways to improve the security system, judicial appraiser, to ensure that the rights of confrontation of the parties, taking into account the efficiency and fairness of the judicial idea. To solve the problem of lack of the newly established expert assistant system the proposed expert assistant system suggestions, provide a basis and reference for the specific case. Finally, due to the law of our country to the expert opinion evidence how the effectiveness of the provisions of the blank, the court in the judicial practice different opinions on self identification of the attitude is not the same, in order to make better use of self identification to resolve disputes the role of how to make self identification of legalization and how to identify the parties to expert opinions are discussed, in order to construct a reasonable appraisal system for the parties themselves Help.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D925.1

【相似文献】