QIAO Fang-e, WANG Facai. The “Trial Restraint Effect” of Civil Self-Admission from the Perspective of Argumentalism[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2023, 39(6): 789-797. doi: 10.19979/j.cnki.issn10082689.2022070071
Citation: QIAO Fang-e, WANG Facai. The “Trial Restraint Effect” of Civil Self-Admission from the Perspective of Argumentalism[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2023, 39(6): 789-797. doi: 10.19979/j.cnki.issn10082689.2022070071

The “Trial Restraint Effect” of Civil Self-Admission from the Perspective of Argumentalism

doi: 10.19979/j.cnki.issn10082689.2022070071
  • Received Date: 2022-07-03
  • Publish Date: 2023-12-25
  • The binding effect of self-admission on the court is the core of self-admission system effectiveness under the polemicism. In contrast, it is confirmed that self-admission has non–“judicial constraint effect “at the level of legal norms. In this regard, the pursuit of true discovery, the prevention of false litigation, the limitation of litigation mode and the status quo of self-identification of evidence are the “Chinese reasons” for this theory. With the continuous improvement of legal norms and the deepening of judges’ understanding, the reasons mentioned above have been shaken or even untenable. On the contrary, the changes in self-admission revocation rules, the strict restrictions on the revocation rules and the generalization of the self-admission objects in practice suggest that the restrictive effect on the activities of court review and recognition of the self-admission fact should be recognized. However, in order to fully implement the substantive connotation of argumentalism, the self-admission object should be strictly limited to the main facts. In order to respect the autonomy of the parties to the greatest extent, the field of self-admission establishment should not be limited to the formal trial, and at the same time, the mechanism of self-admission revocation and overruling should be unified with “truth” as the center.

     

  • [1]
    张锦. 新证据规则下法官查明事实职权活动研究[J]. 云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2021,53(2):147-156. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5110.2021.02.015
    [2]
    段文波. 我国民事自认的非约束性及其修正[J]. 法学研究,2020,42(1):100-116.
    [3]
    张卫平. 民事证据法[M]. 北京: 法律出版社, 2017.
    [4]
    霍海红. 诉讼时效中断证明责任的中国表达[J]. 中外法学,2021,33(2):369-385.
    [5]
    常怡. 比较民事诉讼法[M]. 北京: 中国政法大学出版社, 2002.
    [6]
    沈德咏主编. 最高人民法院民事诉讼法司法解释理解与适用[M]. 北京: 人民法院出版社, 2015.
    [7]
    廖浩. 自认证据化:表征、法理辨证与矫正路径[J]. 南大法学,2021(2):58-75.
    [8]
    张卫平. 民事证据法:建构中的制度移植[J]. 政法论坛,2001(4):87-96.
    [9]
    王亚新, 陈杭平, 刘君博. 中国民事诉讼法重点讲义[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2017.
    [10]
    奚晓明, 杜万华主编. 最高人民法院民事诉讼法司法解释适用解答[M]. 北京: 人民法院出版社, 2015.
    [11]
    李浩. 新《民事诉讼证据规定》的主要问题[J]. 证据科学,2020,28(3):302-314.
    [12]
    陈锦红. 论民事诉讼自认规则的完善[J]. 华东政法学院学报,2004(6):45-50.
    [13]
    张卫平. 事实探知:绝对化倾向及其消解−对一种民事审判理念的自省[J]. 法学研究,2001(4):70-79.
    [14]
    宋朝武. 论民事诉讼中的自认[J]. 中国法学,2003(2):113-123.
    [15]
    沈维琼. 诉讼中的调解与当事人自认−对《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》第67条的法律思考及价值评价[J]. 法律适用,2003(5):30-32.
    [16]
    张卫平. 自由心证原则的再认识:制约与保障−以民事诉讼的事实认定为中心[J]. 政法论丛,2017(4):14-21. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-6274.2017.04.002
    [17]
    任品杰. 论二元制模式下民刑虚假诉讼程序衔接[J]. 甘肃政法大学学报,2021(2):146-156.
    [18]
    傅向宇. 虚假自认效力的辩论主义回归[J]. 国家检察官学院学报,2018,26(1):140-149,175-176. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-9428.2018.01.010
    [19]
    占善刚,徐莹. 自认的审判排除效−《民诉法解释》第92条第3款之初步探讨[J]. 证据科学,2017,25(6):674-683.
    [20]
    贺卫方. 中国古代司法判决的风格与精神−以宋代判决为基本依据兼与英国比较[J]. 中国社会科学,1990(6):203-219.
    [21]
    邱星美,张红娇. 论民事诉讼自认制度之限制性规则[J]. 法律适用,2013(3):57-61.
    [22]
    曹忠,刘耀国. 论自认规则在民事诉讼中的适用[J]. 政治与法律,2004(3):139-142.
    [23]
    吴杰. 论民事诉讼自认的辨识[J]. 甘肃政法学院学报,2009(2):126-128.
    [24]
    最高人民法院民事审判第一庭编著. 最高人民法院新民事诉讼证据规定理解与适用[M]. 北京: 人民法院出版社, 2020.
    [25]
    李喜莲,肖文. 无争议事实记载机制的实践乱象与规范对策[J]. 中南大学学报(社会科学版),2019,25(2):50-58.
    [26]
    高桥宏志. 民事诉讼法制度与理论的深层分析[M]. 林剑锋译, 北京: 法律出版社, 2004.
    [27]
    冉博. 《民事证据新规》视野下自认制度审判排除效的再探讨[J]. 北京科技大学学报(社会科学版),2021,37(2):177-185.
    [28]
    霍海红. 论“重大误解且与事实不符”的自认撤销组合事由−从《民事证据规定(2019)》第9条再出发[J]. 现代法学,2021,43(1):61-73.
  • Relative Articles

    [1]RAN Bo. From the Perspective of “Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Litigation” Re-discussion on the Effect of Preclusion of the Self-admission System[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2021, 37(2): 177-185.
    [2]CHI Da-kui. The Trial Avoidance Effect of Guilty Plea[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2020, 36(5): 84-90,97.
    [3]WANG Fu-fang. Embodied Realism: Theoretical Controversies and Challenges[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2017, 33(4): 20-25.
    [4]WANG Xia. Holocaust and Hayden White's Theory of Historical Explanation: the Theoretical Thinking of Absolutism, Relativism and Pluralism[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2014, 30(1): 69-73.
    [5]LIANG Ping, KONG Ling-zhang. Empirical Research on the Types of Labor Dispute Reasons[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2011, 27(1): 55-60,87.
    [6]SONG Xiu-jian. Theoretical Contest and the Understanding and Practice of Theory——A Case Study of the Spread of Socialism Theory in China for a Century[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2010, 26(3): 112-117.
    [7]PANG Jin-you. Analysis of the Weak Government Theory of Modern Western Liberalism[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2008, 24(4): 32-37.
    [8]KE Yang-you. On The Theory of Issue Preclusion Validity in Civil Litigation[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2007, 23(3): 59-64.
    [9]WANG Hong-zhe. The Legal Philosophy of Critical Rationalism: Albert's Opinions and Method[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2006, 22(4): 74-79.
    [10]WAN Xin-fang. On the Practice of Peng Yuting's “Three Selfs” Principle[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2006, 22(3): 103-106.
    [11]CHENG Mei-dong. Sun Yat-seng's Ideology of the Principle of Democracy[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2006, 22(1): 120-126,136.
    [12]XIAO Jian-hua, LI Zhi-feng. From Adversary System to Cooperative System[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2006, 22(3): 55-62.
    [14]MA Liu-ying. On Amelioration of the System of Civil Witness in China[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2004, 20(1): 87-90.
    [15]ZHANG Qin, LIN Jia-hu. Anlaysis on Chen Du-xiu's Theoretical Criticism to Populism in His Late Years[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2004, 20(2): 75-78.
    [16]SONG Xue-mei. Research on the Reform of the Civil Retrial Procedure in China[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2003, 19(4): 29-33.
    [17]ZHENG Xian-wen. A Elementary Study of the Civil Law concerning Foreign Affairs in Tang Dynasty[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2003, 19(3): 24-29.
    [18]SHAO Ming. Research on the Civil Suit[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2003, 19(2): 13-19.
    [19]ZHANG Bei-gen. The Exposition of DENG Xiao-ping's Theory to Inherit,Abandon and Develop the Theory of the New Democratic Society[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2001, 17(2): 39-42.
    [20]HUAN Jian-li. Individualism +Holism=Structuration Theory?——Summary and Evaluation to Methodology of Western Sociology[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2001, 17(1): 4-8.
  • Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Amount of accessChart context menuAbstract Views, HTML Views, PDF Downloads StatisticsAbstract ViewsHTML ViewsPDF Downloads2024-062024-072024-082024-092024-102024-112024-122025-012025-022025-032025-042025-050102030405060
    Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Chart context menuAccess Class DistributionFULLTEXT: 29.0 %FULLTEXT: 29.0 %META: 65.9 %META: 65.9 %PDF: 5.1 %PDF: 5.1 %FULLTEXTMETAPDF
    Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Chart context menuAccess Area Distribution其他: 6.9 %其他: 6.9 %其他: 0.3 %其他: 0.3 %Seattle: 0.1 %Seattle: 0.1 %上海: 0.5 %上海: 0.5 %临汾: 0.1 %临汾: 0.1 %兰州: 0.9 %兰州: 0.9 %北京: 3.5 %北京: 3.5 %十堰: 0.5 %十堰: 0.5 %南京: 0.9 %南京: 0.9 %南昌: 0.5 %南昌: 0.5 %台州: 0.1 %台州: 0.1 %哈尔滨: 0.1 %哈尔滨: 0.1 %嘉兴: 0.7 %嘉兴: 0.7 %圣巴巴拉: 0.3 %圣巴巴拉: 0.3 %天津: 0.7 %天津: 0.7 %宜昌: 2.4 %宜昌: 2.4 %宣城: 0.9 %宣城: 0.9 %巴音郭楞: 0.1 %巴音郭楞: 0.1 %常州: 0.4 %常州: 0.4 %广州: 0.4 %广州: 0.4 %庆阳: 0.3 %庆阳: 0.3 %张家口: 1.0 %张家口: 1.0 %成都: 0.1 %成都: 0.1 %扬州: 0.5 %扬州: 0.5 %新乡: 0.4 %新乡: 0.4 %昆明: 2.6 %昆明: 2.6 %朝阳: 0.3 %朝阳: 0.3 %枣庄: 0.1 %枣庄: 0.1 %桂林: 0.1 %桂林: 0.1 %武威: 0.1 %武威: 0.1 %武汉: 0.1 %武汉: 0.1 %河源: 0.3 %河源: 0.3 %淄博: 0.1 %淄博: 0.1 %温州: 0.5 %温州: 0.5 %湖州: 0.1 %湖州: 0.1 %湘潭: 0.3 %湘潭: 0.3 %滨州: 0.5 %滨州: 0.5 %漯河: 1.6 %漯河: 1.6 %濮阳: 0.4 %濮阳: 0.4 %烟台: 0.1 %烟台: 0.1 %珠海: 0.4 %珠海: 0.4 %石家庄: 1.4 %石家庄: 1.4 %福州: 0.1 %福州: 0.1 %芒廷维尤: 33.6 %芒廷维尤: 33.6 %芝加哥: 2.4 %芝加哥: 2.4 %衢州: 0.1 %衢州: 0.1 %西宁: 24.5 %西宁: 24.5 %邯郸: 0.4 %邯郸: 0.4 %郑州: 4.8 %郑州: 4.8 %酒泉: 0.1 %酒泉: 0.1 %长沙: 0.5 %长沙: 0.5 %阳泉: 0.3 %阳泉: 0.3 %驻马店: 1.2 %驻马店: 1.2 %其他其他Seattle上海临汾兰州北京十堰南京南昌台州哈尔滨嘉兴圣巴巴拉天津宜昌宣城巴音郭楞常州广州庆阳张家口成都扬州新乡昆明朝阳枣庄桂林武威武汉河源淄博温州湖州湘潭滨州漯河濮阳烟台珠海石家庄福州芒廷维尤芝加哥衢州西宁邯郸郑州酒泉长沙阳泉驻马店

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Article Metrics

    Article views (502) PDF downloads(39) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return