论交通事故认定书在民事诉讼中的审查

发布时间：2018-01-21 00:31

本文关键词： 交通事故认定书证据准司法裁判文书审查规则　出处：《河南大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：交通事故认定书在民事诉讼中发挥着极为重要的作用。然而关于如何审查交通事故认定书这一问题，实务界和理论界一直都争论不休。原因在于，现有学说对交通事故认定书的法律性质无法达成共识。笔者对现有学说仔细分析后发现：每种学说对交通事故认定书的法律属性的认知都存在极大缺陷，因此在回答如何审查交通事故认定书这一问题时也显得极为“吃力”。证据说的问题在于，受法定证据种类归属这一思维定式的影响，将交通事故认定书束缚在证据领域，缺乏一个宏观的视野，无法对其法律属性进行全面的认知；行政行为说将交通事故认定行为界定为行政行为，明显违反现行法的规定，缺乏对法律的“忠诚”；司法认知说虽然对以上两种学说有所突破，但却没有准确地把握交通事故认定书的内容，对其法律属性存在认知错误。与各种学说对应的审查规则也存在种种局限。证据审查规则仅能对交通事故认定书的事实部分“有所作为”，对决定着当事人权利义务关系的法律评价部分却“无能为力”，尤其是在行政救济途径已被“阻死”的情况下，没能为当事人救济自己的权益提供最后的“生机”。行政行为的审查方式也存在问题。交通事故认定行为一旦被认定为行政行为，就意味着其具有公定力。这有可能导致法官对交通事故认定书的盲从，进而直接将其作为定案依据，使当事人再无救济自己权益的可能。此外，由于民事法庭没有审查行政行为的权限，交通事故认定行为的审查只能由行政法庭进行。这容易造成诉讼拖延和诉讼反复。司法认知的效力具有绝对性，不存在被推翻的情形。若将交通事故认定书作为司法认知，则当事人不能质疑，法院也不能审查。正确认知交通事故认定书的法律性质是解决这一纷争的关键。笔者认为，要想正确界定交通事故认定书的法律属性，一方面，要了解其基本内容有哪些，具有何种特性，此为内部认知；另一方面，要了解其在纠纷解决过程中发挥何种作用，此为外部认知。而这两方面的认知都必须在现行法的框架下进行。在充分研读现有理论研究的基础上，依据上述的三个标准，笔者对交通事故认定书的法律属性进行了探讨。从法律规定上看，交通事故认定书具有证据资料与行政司法裁判文书的双重性质；从其内容上看，交通事故认定书包含案件事实与法律判断两部分；从其在纠纷解决中的作用上看，交通事故认定书兼有证明案件事实和定纷止争的作用。由此得出结论：交通事故认定书不仅具有证据的法律属性，也具有准司法裁判文书的法律性质。因此，应该根据交通事故认定书的法律属性，分别采用证据审查规则和准司法文书审查规则，对其不同的内容进行审查。对于事实部分，适用证据审查规则。具体而言，就是审查其是否具备证据的合法性、客观性及关联性。合法性的审查，主要是确定交通事故认定书是否具有证据资格；客观性的审查，主要是确定交通事故认定书的真实性与可靠性如何；关联性的审查，主要是确定交通事故认定书的证明力大小。合法性和客观性的审查相对简单，易于操作。而关联性审查有些难度，面临着如何处理当事人举证困难和交通事故认定书证据优势的问题。笔者以为，解决该难题的一个可行性做法是，法院应调取制定交通事故认定书所依据的基础证据，在综合分析这些证据的基础上审查其事实部分。对于法律评价部分，应适用准司法裁判文书的审查规则，对交通事故认定书的制定程序、事实认定及法律适用进行审查。制定程序的审查，主要针对交通事故认定书的制定期限、制作主体及文书送达等内容进行。事实认定的审查，，主要是审查制定主体在进行事实认定时是否遵循了自由裁量权的行使规则——思维法则、经验法则及自然法则；法官的说理义务；法定证据规则。法律适用的审查，主要是审查制作主体对当事人责任进行划分时是否遵从了法定的归责原则。
[Abstract]:Traffic accident in civil litigation plays an extremely important role. However, on how to review the traffic accident this problem in theory and in practice has been debated. The reason is that the existing theories on the legal nature of traffic accident identification book can not reach a consensus. The author of the present theory after careful analysis found each kind of theory of the legal nature of traffic accident identification book cognition has many defects, so the confirmation of this problem in answer to how to review the traffic accident is extremely difficult.
Is the evidence that, under the influence of legal evidence type ownership of this mindset, the traffic accident evidence bound in the field, the lack of a macro perspective, not to conduct a comprehensive understanding of its legal attribute; administrative behavior that the behavior of traffic accident identification defined as administrative acts, a clear violation of the existing law provisions the lack of legal "loyalty"; judicial notice said that although the breakthrough of the above two theories, but not accurately grasp the traffic accident that the contents of the book, the legal attribute of cognitive errors. The corresponding rules also have various limitations and various doctrines. The rules of reviewing evidence can only be part of facts "the book as" the identification of traffic accident, legal evaluation determines the relationship of rights and obligations of the parties are "incapable of action", especially in administrative relief way has been blocked Under the circumstances, did not provide the final "vitality" for the parties to relief their rights. Administrative review is also problematic. The behavior of traffic accident identification once identified as the administrative act means that it has authority. This may lead to the confirmation of blind traffic accident, and then directly as the basis, the parties no relief their rights and interests. In addition, the civil court did not review the administrative authority, the traffic accident behavior review only by the administrative court. It is easy to cause the lawsuit delay and the procedure repeated. The effect of judicial notice is absolute, there is no ousted. If the traffic accident as the judicial cognition, parties can not be questioned, the court cannot review.
Correct understanding of traffic accident identification and the legal nature of the book is the key to solve the dispute. The author thinks that, in order to correctly define the legal attribute of the traffic accident, a book, to understand the basic content of what kind of features, this is the internal cognition; on the other hand, to understand the role of solving in this dispute, as the external cognition. These two aspects of cognition must be carried out within the framework of positive law. Based on the full study of the existing theoretical research, based on these three criteria, the author of the book of the legal attribute of the traffic accident identification is discussed. From a legal perspective, the responsibility of traffic accident the book has the dual nature of the evidence and administrative judicial documents; from the content point of view, the traffic accident case facts and legal judgment includes two parts; from the solution by the view in the dispute, The traffic accident affirmation has the function of proving the facts of the case and deciding disputes. The conclusion is that the traffic accident affirmation not only has the legal attribute of the evidence, but also has the legal nature of the quasi judicial adjudication document.
Therefore, the traffic accident should be based on the legal attribute of the book, using the rules of reviewing evidence and review rules of judicial documents, the review of the contents of the part. For the fact, apply the rules of reviewing evidence. Specifically, is to examine the legitimacy if it has evidence, objectivity and relevance. The legitimacy of the review. The traffic accident is to determine whether there is evidence qualification; the objectivity of the review is to determine how the authenticity and reliability of traffic accident; the relevance of the review is to determine the traffic accident identified the probative force of the size of the book. The legitimacy and objectivity of the examination is relatively simple, easy to operate and examine the relevance. Some difficulty, faced with how to deal with the difficulty of collecting evidence and traffic accident evidence advantage problem. The author thinks that a feasible approach to solve the problem Is that the court should make the transfer of traffic accident identification based on evidence, review part of the facts in a comprehensive analysis based on these evidences for legal evaluation, should apply the quasi judicial adjudicative document review rules of traffic accident identification procedures for the book, facts and legal review procedures. The review, mainly for the traffic accident of the development period, the main production and service of documents and other content. The facts of review, the review is mainly on the fact that policy makers are compliant with the exercise of discretion rule -- the law of thought, experience and rules of natural law; compulsory reasoning judge; legal evidence rules. The applicable law review, the review is mainly subject to divide the responsibility of the parties when compliance with the statutory principle of imputation.

【学位授予单位】：河南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.1;D922.14

【参考文献】