International Open Access Journal Platform

我国民事诉讼证明标准的层次化——以环境侵权诉讼为例

The Hierarchy of the Standard of Proving in China’s Civil Procedure—Taking Environmental Tort Action as an Example

Progress in Social Sciences / 2021,3(6): 582-595 / 2021-12-29 551 474

View Download PDF

• Authors: 程苏起
• Information:

  上海政法学院，上海

• Keywords:
  Hierarchical; Environmental tort litigation; High probability; Probability prevails
  层次化; 环境侵权诉讼; 高度盖然性; 盖然性占优
• Abstract: The establishment of the standard of proving should not only protect fairness and justice, but also improve the efficiency of litigation, save litigation resources, and achieve the balance between economic cost and economic benefit. In the provisions on Evidence in Civil Procedure amended in 2019, the standard of proving for procedural matters such as withdrawal is more likely to be adopted, which indicates that the standard of proving in civil procedure in China is gradually becoming hierarchical. According to different cases, standards of proving of corresponding degree are adopted, such as roughly presumption and apparent proof in civil law countries, and “clear and convincing proof ” in common law countries, etc. These hierarchical standards of proving provide ideas for the hierarchical standards of proving of civil procedure in China. Taking the environmental tort lawsuit as an example, different levels of standards of proving should be applied to different subjects of proving to balance the litigation status of the original defendant. For different facts to be proved, different standards of proving are adopted to better realize the legislative purpose of environmental tort litigation. 证明标准的制定既要保护公平正义又要提高诉讼效率、节约诉讼资源，实现经济成本与经济效益的平衡。2019 年修正的《民事诉讼证据若干规定》增加了对回避等程序事项采用“可能性较大”的证明标准规定，这表明我国民事诉讼证明标准逐步走向层次化。针对不同案件，采用相应程度的证明标准，大陆法系国家的大致推定、表见证明，英美法系国家“清晰而有说服力的证明”等标准，这些层次化的证明标准为我国民事诉讼证明标准的层次化提供思路。以环境侵权诉讼为例，对于不同的证明主体，适用不同层次的证明标准，以平衡原被告的诉讼地位；对于不同的待证事实，采用不同程度的证明标准，以更好实现环境侵权诉讼的立法目的。
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.35534/pss.0305048
• Cite: 程苏起．我国民事诉讼证明标准的层次化——以环境侵权诉讼为例［J］．社会科学进展，2021，3（6）：582-595．