—以 2012 年《民事诉论法》及其司法解释为对象

龙兴盛 王 聪

（长沙市中级人民法院，湖南长沙 410007）

【摘 要】证据失权被认为是我国民事诉讼中最具争议的制度 , 由于该制度本身的双面性，以及我国司法公信力羸弱的现实，基于社会效果考虑，法官在面对迟来的证据时，慎用乃至弃用证据失权便成为符合情理的制度性“防卫措施”。通过比较法视野观察，我国新《民事诉讼法》及司法解释对证据失权秉持务实而谨慎的态度。通过司法个案观察，为作出既慎重正确又迅速经济的裁判，法官在适用证据失权时必须三思而后行，综合考量案件具体情况反复斟酌，只有当事人违反诉讼促进义务，逾期举证存在故意或重大过失且该证据与案件基本事实无关时，证据失权制裁才能成为法官迫不得已使用的“最后一招”。

【关键词】举证时限 ；证据失权 ；逾期 ；制裁 ；准备程序

【中图分类号】D915.13

【文献标识码】A

【文章编号】1674-1226（2016）01-0043-14

Consilience and transcendence: cautious application of evidence disqualification in Chinese civil procedure—with the code and judicial interpretation of civil procedure law. Long Xingshen, Wang Chong.Changsha City Intermediate People's Court, Changsha, Hunan 410007

【Abstract】Evidence disqualification is considered to be the most controversial design in Chinese civil procedure law. Due to the bifurcated nature of the system itself, as well as the reality of the society’s weakness in judicial faith and its social effects, when judges facing belated evidence, as a reasonable “defensive measure”,they hardly apply the evidence disqualification rule. From a perspective of comparative law, the 2012 enacted Chinese civil procedure law and its judicial interpretations uphold a pragmatical and cautious attitude towards the evidence disqualification rule. By observing individual judicial cases, to make proper and economic judgments, the judge should think twice before applying the evidence disqualification rule based on case-by-case circumstances. Only when the parties breach the obligation of promoting civil action deliberately or negligently,as well as if the evidence has no relation with basic case facts, will the rule be applied as the last measure to make the evidence invalid.

【Key Words】Limitation period of proving evidence, Evidence disqualification, Overdue, Sanction, Pretrial procedure