駁倒對方 的英文怎麼說
中文拼音 [bódǎoduìfāng]
駁倒對方
英文
refute an opponent- 駁 : Ⅰ動詞1 （辨正是非; 列舉理由否定別人的錯誤意見） refute; rebut; argue; contradict; gainsay 2 （駁...
- 倒 : 倒動詞1 （人或豎立的東西橫躺下來） fall; topple 2 （事業失敗; 垮臺） collapse; fail 3 （嗓子變低...
- 對 : Ⅰ動詞1 （回答） answer; reply 2 （對待; 對付） treat; cope with; counter 3 （朝; 向; 面對） be tr...
- 方 : Ⅰ名詞1 （方形; 方體） square 2 [數學] （乘方） involution; power 3 （方向） direction 4 （方面） ...
-
We sometimes disputed, and very fond we were of argument, and very desirous of confuting one another.
我們時有爭論，也特別喜好辯論，常想駁倒對方。There are some people who will use any kind of argument, no matter how illogical, so long as they can score off an opponent.
有些人為了要駁倒對方，不惜用任何不合邏輯的辯論。It is not many scholars to clearly prove the opinion of shifting the burden of proof, on the contrary the contradictory scholars are more prominent, for example the vice professor of southwest politics and law university, chengang, wuyue who translates and introduces the burden of proof of germany, because them there are more and more people support the opposite opinion, while in the draft of " civil evidence code ", the traditional idea win, in this draft the legislator abides by the present justice and our country ' s native circumstance, they made an scientific choice, of course, the burden of proof will directly influence the party " s possibility of losing the lawsuit, while the regulation of shifting the burden of proof increases the plaintiff ' s opportunity to win a lawsuit. to explain what is the shifting of burden of proof, the paper use the civil law as the example to point out the " reverse " is not entirly relieve the plaintiff s obligation of producing evidence, but in certain extent and in certain range make the defendant bear the burden of producing those proofs from the reverse way, which are originally beard by the plaintiff. in the three proceeding law, shifting the burden of proof have some differences, but the interior spirits are coincident - for the values of social justice and the legal reason
論證舉證責任倒置的學者觀點明確並且論證十分充分的不多，相反卻是對此著書立說予以反駁的學者較為突出，如西南政法大學的副教授陳則博士，翻譯並介紹德國證明責任學說的吳越先生均是目前國內對舉證責任倒置持否定態度的代表人物，由於他們的推動使得國內持此說的人越來越多，但在《民事證據法（草案） 》的擬定過程中，並未采責任倒置的地位，這樣的立法選擇是建立在對我國法律實現的本土環境客觀認識的基礎上的科學選擇，誠然，舉證責任的分配直接影響到當事人在訴訟中的敗訴風險，而「倒置」規則的設計，則在此問題上增加了原告勝訴的籌碼，在理解何為舉證責任倒置時，本文著重以民事法為主線，指出這種「倒置」並非全部免除原告的證明責任，而是在一定范圍與一定程度上將通常應由原告負擔的舉證責任轉由被告從反方面承擔，舉證責任倒置在三大訴訟法中所體現的具體情形有所差異，但它們的內在精神是一致的?法律的理性與社會公平價值，在民事訴訟中舉證責任倒置的情形，一般總是將其局限於特殊侵權情形，而忽略了民事合同違約責任的訴訟中的原告也無須對被告應承擔違約責任的所有要件，對被告主觀上的過錯實行推定，若被告予以否定則應對其無過錯的證據舉證，在設置舉證責任倒置的規則時，從各國的立法經驗與法的內在價值要求可以總結出以下幾個原則:程序法與實體法結合原則，公平原則，訴訟經濟原則，保護弱者原則等，基於此完善舉證責任倒置的規則時首先應肯定舉證責任倒置的概念，其次立法應避免求大求全，再次要配合實體法的發展，最後還可以在司法領域嘗試判例的指導意義。
分享友人