摘要
在《知产证据规定》颁布之前,行政行为认定的事实依托公文书证的证明力推定规则,通过《民诉法解释》第114条对民事诉讼中的证明产生影响。《知产证据规定》第6条明确了行政行为认定的基本事实在民事诉讼中具有免证效力,该事实应当限缩解释为公文书载明的对可诉行政行为产生实质影响的事实理由,需要相对方承担本证的举证责任方可推翻。该条款在知识产权诉讼领域对公文书证实质证明力进行限缩,采取的路径是从公文书证的内容出发限缩其实质证明力。这一方案具有内在的合理性与普遍适用的可能性,为公文书证实质证明力规则的完善提供了新路径。
Prior to the promulgation of the“Provisions on Evidence in Intellectual Property Civil Litigation”,the facts ascertained by administrative actions relied on the presumption of probative power of public documents and Article 114 of the“Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law”.Article 6 of the“Provisions on Evidence in Intellectual Property Civil Litigation”clarifies that the essential facts determined by administrative acts have the effect of exemption from evidence in civil litigation,and the facts should be so limited as to be interpreted as factual reasons that have a substantial impact on the actionable administrative acts as stated in the public documents.It can be overturned only if the opposite party bears the burden of proof of this evidence.In the field of intellectual property litigation,this clause limits the probative force of public documents,and the path taken is to limit their substantive probative force from the content of the public documents.This scheme has inherent rationality and the possibility of universal application,and it provides a new path for the improvement of the rules of substantive probative force of public documents.
作者
毋爱斌
范响
Wu Aibin;Fan Xiang
出处
《法治现代化研究》
CSSCI
2024年第1期134-143,共10页
Law and Modernization
关键词
行政行为
公文书证
证明力
知识产权证据规定
administrative act
public documents
probative force
provisions on intellectual property evidence
作者简介
毋爱斌,西南政法大学法学院副教授,西南政法大学人民法庭研究中心副主任;范响,西南政法大学人民法庭研究中心研究人员。
