舉證責(zé)任論文：淺析網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物糾紛中的舉證責(zé)任制度

1、舉證責(zé)任論文：淺析網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物糾紛中的舉證責(zé)任制度【中文摘要】網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物在經(jīng)歷了幾年的飛速發(fā)展后，呈現(xiàn)了一種 異常繁榮的景象。然而繁榮的背后卻是缺乏法律監(jiān)管所帶來的糾紛不 斷，以及糾紛難斷。由于網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物的特殊性，在買賣雙方糾紛發(fā)生之后, 如何分配舉證責(zé)任是解決糾紛的重要環(huán)節(jié)。筆者認(rèn)為應(yīng)遵循三個方面 的原則對網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物糾紛中的舉證責(zé)任進(jìn)行完善。首先，原告和被告所 負(fù)擔(dān)的舉證責(zé)任應(yīng)當(dāng)是相當(dāng)?shù)?。由于?dān)負(fù)舉證責(zé)任的程度與其所應(yīng)當(dāng) 承受的敗訴風(fēng)險是對應(yīng)的，又根據(jù)程序正義的要求，對于原告和被告 之間所承受的舉證責(zé)任應(yīng)當(dāng)做出合理的分配，不應(yīng)當(dāng)將全部的舉證責(zé) 任強加給一方，因為這樣就意味著他也必須要承受相應(yīng)程度的敗訴

2、風(fēng) 險，使其完全的處于訴訟地位中的劣勢，而在訴訟過程中很難勝訴。其 次，應(yīng)當(dāng)根據(jù)當(dāng)事人的舉證能力、條件及其所處的地位來分配證明責(zé) 任，使更有能力，更有條件的一方負(fù)有的舉證責(zé)任，這樣更有利于收集 到的證據(jù)，從而能夠證明到更接近于案件的客觀真實，而對于缺乏條 件和證明能力較弱的一方，減輕其證明的負(fù)擔(dān)，只有根據(jù)當(dāng)事人的舉 證能力和條件及其所處的地位類分配證明責(zé)任,才能更好的維護(hù)訴訟 的程序正義。最后，應(yīng)當(dāng)從訴訟經(jīng)濟(jì)和效率方面著手來規(guī)范舉證責(zé)任 的分配。作為民事訴訟制度的內(nèi)在要求的訴訟經(jīng)濟(jì)又稱訴訟節(jié)約，它 主要解決訴訟程序的效率問題。本文分為三個部分，第一部分分析我 國網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物糾紛中舉證責(zé)任分配的立法

3、現(xiàn)狀，有哪些法律問題和現(xiàn)實 問題阻礙著網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物糾紛的解決。第二部分介紹了美國以及歐盟這樣 的發(fā)達(dá)市場經(jīng)濟(jì)體制國家關(guān)于網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物責(zé)任的相關(guān)立法情況,對我國 這方面問題如何規(guī)定是一個參考。第三部分重點闡述了筆者關(guān)于網(wǎng)絡(luò) 購物特殊環(huán)境下如何分配雙方舉證責(zé)任,以及第三方在糾紛中所應(yīng)該 扮演何種舉證角色?！居⑽恼縊nline shopping has experienced several years of rapid development, presented an unusual prosperity. However, it is behind the prosperity brought a

4、bout by the lack of legal and regulatory disputes continued, and disputes too hard. The particularity of online shopping because, after a dispute in the buyers and sellers, how to allocate the burden of proof is an important part of resolving disputes. I think we should follow the principles of the

5、three aspects of online shopping disputes to perfect the burden of proof. First, the burden of the plaintiff and the defendant the burden of proof should be considerable. Bear the burden of proof because the degree of its fair share of the corresponding risk losing, but also according to the require

6、ments of procedural justice, between the plaintiff and the defendant should bear the burden of proof to make a reasonable allocation, not all of the burden of proof should be imposed to the party because it means that he must bear the corresponding risk level of losing it completely in the inferior

7、position in the litigation, but hard to win during the proceedings. Secondly, the burden of proof should be based on ability of the parties, the condition and the status to allocate the burden of proof, so that more capable, better equipped to bear more of the party the burden of proof, so that is m

8、ore conducive to gather more evidence, which can prove to the case closer to objective truth, and the lack of conditions for the weaker side and proved to reduce the burden of the proof, only evidence of the parties, ability and class conditions and the status assigned the burden of proof to better

9、maintenance of procedural justice proceedings. Finally, it should be from the aspects of economy and efficiency actions to regulate the allocation of the burden of proof. The inherent requirements of a civil litigation system, also known as action to save the economy, which mainly address the effici

10、ency of the proceedings.This article is divided into three parts, the first analysis of the online shopping disputes legislative status of the burden of proof allocation, there are legal and practical issues which impede online shopping disputes. The second part describes the United States and the E

11、uropean Union such a developed market economy country on the responsibility of the relevant legislation online shopping situation, this aspect of our country how to provide a reference. The third part focuseson the special paper on the online shopping environment, how to allocate both the burden of

12、proof, and the third party in the dispute in the evidence should play what role.【關(guān)鍵詞】舉證責(zé)任 舉證責(zé)任分配網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物【英文關(guān)鍵詞】burden of proof allocation of theburden of proof online shopping【目錄】淺析網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物糾紛中的舉證責(zé)任制度摘要3-4 ABSTRACT 4-5一、我國網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物糾紛中舉證責(zé)任的問題分析8-15（一）立法規(guī)定的缺失和不足8-9（二）網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物糾紛處理中的問題9-11（三）網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物糾紛中的舉證困境11-121.存在網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物交易的證

13、明11-122.違反合同約定的證明12（四）第三方對網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物糾紛中舉證責(zé)任的影響12-15 二、網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物糾紛中舉證責(zé)任的外國法借鑒15-19（一）美國關(guān)于網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物糾紛解決的相關(guān)立法16（二）歐盟關(guān)于網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物糾紛解決的相關(guān)立法19三、我國網(wǎng)絡(luò)購物糾紛中舉證責(zé)任制度的構(gòu)建19-29（一）舉證責(zé)任理論19-21（二）賣方舉證責(zé)任21-241.賣方應(yīng)就是否盡到善意告知義務(wù)舉證212.賣方應(yīng)對是否真實交付商品舉證21-233.賣方應(yīng)就是否轉(zhuǎn)移商品所有權(quán)舉證23-244.賣方應(yīng)就是否履行與物流公司協(xié)調(diào)的義務(wù)舉證24（三）買方舉證責(zé)任24-261.買方應(yīng)就是否支付貨款舉證24-252.買方應(yīng)就是否按合同約定的時間、地點和方式接收商品舉證253.買方應(yīng)就是否驗收