英文摘要
|
This article is to discuss the issue of obtaining evidence abroad while letting the Taiwan court hear the foreign-related civil cases. First, this article will introduce the difference between procedural systems of different countries. In inquisitional procedural model, the court collects the evidence, and in adversarial system, the party have the right to collect evidence under court's permit. Due to the difference, the extraterritorial evidence collection system is also different in inquisitional and adversarial procedural model. Because of the difference between litigation system, rules and regulations to obtain evidence abroad is different. In addition, the applicable law and choice-of-law rule of the burden of proof is different. The way to obtain evidence abroad is through international judicial cooperation and the letter of request system. This article focuses on the letter of request system, including the requisite of letter of request, content and the form of the letter of the request. And if Taiwan courts want to require foreign court to collect evidence, Taiwan courts shall examine the requisite whether it shall conform to. At the end, this article will discuss the issue of Blocking Statute and Fishing Research. In some counties, the party could collect evidence abroad according to the court rulings that may undermine the sovereignty of foreign country. Some countries adopted the formulation of refusal laws and regulations which called Blocking Statute to resist this kind of evidence-collection. The Blocking Statute originates from the duty to keep secret of client's materials or national security. When there is Blocking Statute in that country, could the court allow the party to collect evidence in that country? This article further discusses the issue of Fishing Research and attempts toand resolve the question of obtaining evidence abroad whether through judicial cooperation or not.
|
参考文献
|
-
陳瑋祐(2017)。民事訴訟法上事證開示與秘密保護之比較研究-以專利侵權事件為例。臺北大學法學論叢,104,137-215。
連結:
-
BRIGGS, ADRIAN(2014).PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW IN ENGLISH COURTS.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
-
DAMAŠKA, MIRJAN R.(1986).THE FACES OF THE JUSTICE AND THE STATE AUTHORITY, A COMPARATIVE APPROACH TO THE LEGAL PROCESS.New Haven, CT:Yale University Press.
-
Geimer, Reinhold(2009).Internationales Zivilprozessrecht.
-
HARTLEY, TREVOR C.(2009).INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL LITIGATION: TEXT CASES AND MATERIALS ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
-
Nagel, Heinrich,Gottwald, Peter(2007).Internationales Zivilprozessrecht.
-
Schack, Haimo(2006).Internationales Zivilverfahrensrecht.
-
何其生(2015).比較法視野下的國際民事訴訟.高等教育出版社.
-
呂太郎(2022).民事訴訟法.元照出版有限公司.
-
沈冠伶(2013).民事證據法與武器平等原則.元照出版有限公司.
-
姜世明(2014).民事訴訟法(下).新學林出版公司.
-
許士宦(2021).口述民事訴訟法(下).新學林出版公司.
-
劉明生(2017)。摸索證明禁止之原則。月旦法學雜誌,181,39-43。
-
賴淳良(2022)。跨境遠距審理。跨國法的啟蒙與薪傳-李復甸教授七秩華誕祝壽論文集
-
魏大喨(2021).民事訴訟法.三民書局股份有限公司.
|