proof law 中文意思是什麼

The third part of this article mainly discusses the causal relationship in market manipulation, which is a block of the enforcement of the law against market fraudulences. because market manipulation is a kind of special tort, the author agree on the use of the " proof to the contrary " theory to lighten the proof burden of the damaged party in causal relationship. besides, this part also discusses such issues as how to decide the scope of legal plaintiffs, how to assess the losses of the damaged party

本文第三部分「操縱市場的因果關系研究」從民法一般的因果關系理論入手，並結合操縱市場的侵權行為中因果關系的特殊性，論述了操縱市場的侵權行為中因果關系是否成立的判斷標準，並主張對因果關系在民事訴訟中舉證責任的分配應突破「法律要件分類說」的要求，適用因果關系舉證責任倒置的做法，即由操縱市場案件中的被告負擔證明責任成立因果關系不成立的舉證責任，否則即推定因果關系成立。

Article 34 the term " proof of tax payment certificate " as stated inarticle22 of the tax administration law shall refer to the various types of tax paid certificates, tax memos, revenue stamps, withholding certificates and other documentation of tax payment

第三十四條稅收征管法第二十二條所稱完稅憑證，是指各種完稅證、繳款書、印花稅票、扣（收）稅憑證以及其他完稅證明。

In continental law system countries, burden of proof includes burden of adducing evidence, burden of persuasion. burden of adducing evidence means that the subjects in criminal procedure who initiate trial procedure and require the courts to judge according to their demands or subject whom there is presumption against must adduce adequate " evidence of the fact to prove that the evidence is on the demand of proof. otherwise the subjects will fail in the suit

筆者認為，刑事訴訟證明責任，是指在刑事訴訟中引起審判程序啟動並要求法院依其主張裁判或存在對其不利之法律推定的刑事訴訟主體，必須就其主張的對定罪量刑具有決定作用的待證特定事實或者為推翻不利的推定事實提出足夠證據，並利用證據對該事實或或者為推翻不利的推定事實加以證明到法律規定的程度。

With the improvement in the overall diathesis and operational capabilities of chinese law professionals, the issue on the distribution of burden of proof has increasingly become the focus in the court debates

隨著我國法律工作者整體素質及業務能力的提高，證明責任分配問題也日漸成為法庭辯論的焦點。

In the forth part, the writer discusses the conditions when judge exercises the right of discretion in allocating the burden of proof. there are four conditions as followed : l, court proceeding and court debate have ended ; 2, non liquet ; 3, not regulated by law ; 4, not regulated by judicial interpretation

在論述遵循誠實信用原則時，作者認為應考慮以下幾個方面:一是以不正當方法形成有利於自己的訴訟狀態;二是惡意訴訟;三是濫用訴訟權利、拖延訴訟;四是翻悔自認;五是提供證據的不正當行為。

Accordin to united states of america law, all the paints on the painted products must not contain lead ( the factory must be able to provide proof ) and packaged securely to arrive at final delivery point in good condition

根據美國法律，所有塗色產品的顏料中不得含鉛（廠家必須提供不含鉛的證明） ，並且應有安全包裝，完好無損的到達交貨地。

On bona fides in proof law

論證據法上的誠信

On the confirmation of foreign law ' s burden proof

論外國法證明責任的確定

This dissertation, through discussing respectively and researching by comparative method as to the compensation for damages for breach of a contract and for the infringement arising from road traffic accident which is related to serve contract, raises that, there exist mutual part and difference in the scope of damages, the principle of the fixation of liability, the proof of evidence, the rule of the counteraction between faults, the undertaking of the third party for the fault liability, the dealing of the free - rider with good - faith, as to the contract law and tort law in china

筆者在論文中，通過對具有服務合同關系的道路交通事故的違約損害賠償、侵權損害賠償的分別闡述和比較研究，說明了我國合同法和侵權行為法這兩種法律規范在賠償范圍、歸責原則、舉證責任、過失相抵規則適用、第三人過錯責任承擔、好意同乘者的處理等方面，既有相同之處，也存在諸多差異。

Having this in mind, researching methodologies and ideas of this paper are based on the analysis of general principles of burden of proof in civil law. meanwhile, taking into account the specialties of shipping law, this paper compared the rules of burden of proof among hague rules, hague - visby rules, hamburg rules, draft of united states carriage of goods by sea act 1999 ( cogsa ), china maritime code and china contract act 2000

有鑒於此，本論文對海運貨損索賠舉證責任的研究是建立在對一般民事舉證責任分析的基礎上，結合海商法特點，重點對《海牙規則》 、 《海牙威斯比規則》 、 《漢堡規則》 、美國1999年海上貨物運輸法草案以及我國《合同法》 、 《海商法》對海運貨損索賠舉證責任的規定做了具體的比較和分析。

The theory and legislation of proof limitation system is an important part of proof burden system and the judicial procedure of civil law. due to its conflict with substantial justice, the system of time limit for proof limitation could make the judgment of value and realize its value of rational justice only in the litigation notion of justice of formalities

任何制度的存在和發展都應有其內在的價值取向，作為訴訟程序制度內容一部分的舉證時限制度，由於與實質正義的立場存有一定的對立性，其本身也只有在程序正義的訴訟理念下，才能發揮其價值評價的功效，才能夠在追尋結果的過程中達到一種相對平衡的理性正義價值。

The chinese citizen that is in abroad is sent from abroad hand in or hold those who deliver accredit proxy in the palm, must be stationed in this country via china proof of diplomatic and consular missions, do not have diplomatic and consular missions, be stationed in the diplomatic and consular missions of this country to prove by the the three kingdoms that has foreign relations with china, turn to be stationed in proof of diplomatic and consular missions of this the three kingdoms by china again, perhaps prove by organization of patriotic overseas chinese, new zealand has chinese embassy, you are good by the first kind of square deal with according to law, to the chinese embassy of new zealand, attestation, mail accredit a power of attorney it is ok to go back to the motherland

在國外的中國公民從國外寄交或者託交授權委託書的，必須經中國駐該國使領館證實，沒有使領館的，由與中國有外交關系的第三國駐該國的使領館證實，再轉由中國駐該第三國使領館證實，或者由當地的愛國華僑團體證實，紐西蘭有中國大使館，你按第一種方法辦就好了，到紐西蘭的中國大使館，認證一下，把授權委託書郵寄回國就可以了。

When have analyzed the method of alleviating the patient ’ s burden of proof, specific methods are proposed. author suggest that court should accept the sue only if the patient prove the cause to the degree the average person regard the cause true, the burden of proof is bored on medical organization when the being proving fact provided by patient is highly possible ; the burden of proof is bored on patient when being proving fact provided by patient is less possible but the fact is only clue and medical organization take on responsibility of explanation ; and the burden of proof is bored on the patient when the fact is impossible. author proposed also method to form a complete set, which is establishing the principle of free prove, dividing the cause into cause in fact and cause in law and establishing the standard for possibility

筆者在分析了減輕患者證明責任的途徑之後，提出了完善醫療糾紛訴訟中證明責任分配的具體方法:將《最高人民法院關于證據的若干規定》第四條第八款修改為:患者就醫療行為向法院提起訴訟，必須就醫療方存在過錯或者損害與醫療行為之間存在事實上的因果關系的證明達到依一般人的觀點，可以合理懷疑的程度時，法院才能受理;對患者提出的有爭議的待證事實，具有高度的蓋然性的，由醫療方承擔證明責任，事實真偽不明時，由醫療方承擔敗訴風險;對待證的事實蓋然性較低，但該事實是唯一具體線索的可能性時，由醫療方承擔解明義務，在醫療方已經盡了解明義務而事實仍然真偽不明時，仍由患者承擔敗訴風險;對蓋然性很低的案件，由患者承擔證明責任。

Evidence system is one of the most important questions in the civil proceedings and standard of proof is an important question in the evidence system. the civil procedure law applies the standard of " highly probable " in civil litigations. this article points out that it is not reasonable to adopt the " highly probable " standard in all civil litigations. firstly, this article mentions the important meaning of standard of proof in judicial proof. secondly, it pionts out the flaws in the standard of proof in civil litigation in our country. thirdly, it introduces the standard of proof in civil litigation in common law and civil law countries and analyzes the similar and different points in the standard of proof. finally this article points out several suggestions to rebuild the system of standard of proof. lt suggests we should construct a system which considers the " highly probable " standard as a principle and adopts other forms of standard of proof in sepcial civil cases. and we can build this reasonable system by means of legislation and case law

但在所有民事案件中均劃一適用較高程度的蓋然性作為證明標準是不合理的。文章首先闡明了民事訴訟證明標準在訴訟證明中的重要意義，然後對於我國有關民事訴訟證明標準的現狀及其缺陷作了一個概括，接著文章對于兩大法系民事訴訟證明標準的異同進行了介紹以及比較分析，最後提出了對于構建一個科學的民事訴訟證明標準體系的幾點建議。文章建議應當通過立法以及判例制度來建立一個以較高程度的蓋然性為原則的多元的證明標準體系。

Article 63 where the holder is unable to obtain proof of dishonor on account of the death or escape of the acceptor or the drawee or for other reasons, the holder may obtain other relevant evidence according to law

第六十三條持票人因承兌人或者付款人死亡、逃匿或者其他原因，不能取得拒絕證明的，可以依法取得其他有關證明。

Article 63 in cases when the bearer is unable to obtain proof of refusal to accept or pay the bill because of the death or flight of the acceptor or payer or other causes ， the bearer may procure other relevant proof according to the law

第六十三條持票人因承兌人或者付款人死亡、逃匿或者其他原因，不能取得拒絕證明的，可以依法取得其他有關證明。

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。

Thoughts on the notarization proof law

對公證的證據學思考

Causality presumption is the issue that stretches over tort law and the proof law, it has little influences in the legislation and court, compared with the fault presumption

摘要古典因果關系理論不適應現代社會，在環境侵權領域，因果關系之調整以及因果關系推定之確立乃屬必然。

Any judgement for case fact will follow basic proof law, how to utilize rationally standardly in the program of civil procedure to measure lie technical judgement evidence on, need to not only legislate perfect further, also need that we explore further further

任何對案件事實的判斷都要遵循基本的證明規律，如何在民事訴訟程序中理性地規范地運用測謊技術判斷證據，不僅需要立法上進一步完善，也需要我們進一步深入地探索。