更新时间：04-26 （soso）提供原创文章
摘要：非法证据排除最先在美国的刑事诉讼领域中得以确立和发展，其初衷在于限制拥有公权力的侦查人员（主要指警察）滥用权力侵害公民的合法权益，核心价值在于保障人权。此后，众多国家纷纷肯定该规则的价值并以此为蓝本，在本国的诉讼领域中确立非法证据排除的相关规则。我国也在三大诉讼领域中确立了与排除非法证据相关的一系列规范。其中民事非法证据排除规则从确立至今先后经历了旧标准与新标准两个不同的阶段。新标准在批判继承的基础上对非法证据排除进行了新的鉴定和诠释。对新标准的把握，应当以重大违法作为排除非法证据的实质性标准，并在法官自由心证的过程中引入利益衡量原则来确定是否构成重大违法；此外，有鉴于我国现阶段民事诉讼当事人收集证据能力较弱、当事人取证的保障机制尚不健全的国情，应尽量扩大合法证据的范围，提高当事人取得证据的可采信度；同时，明确在特定情况下不适用非法证据排除的相关规范。
关键词：民事诉讼 合法性 非法证据 重大违法 利益衡量
Abstract: Eliminating illegal evidence of criminal litigation in the United States first in the field can be established and development, its purpose is to restrict the investigators have public power (mainly refers to the police) abuse of power enroach on the legal rights of citizens, core value is to protect human rights. Since then, many countries have sure this rule by the value of the original version, and in their lawsuit establishment eliminating illegal evidence in the field of relevant rules. China also in three litigation fields established and exclude illegal evidence related series of specifications. Including civil illegal evidence elimination from established so far has gone through the old standard and the new standard two different stages. In the new standard based on critical inheritance of illegal evidence rule new interpretation. New standards to grasp, should take major illegal as exclusion of the illegal evidence in the judge, and the substantive standards in the process of free heart syndrome introduced the principle to determine whether benefit measure constitutes a major illegal; In addition, in view of our country present stage civil litigants collecting evidence ability is weak, the parties, the safeguard mechanism of forensics is unsound's situation, should try to expand the scope of legal evidence obtained evidence, improve the parties of recoverable reliability; Meanwhile, clear in specific cases of illegal evidence elimination shall not apply to relevant specification.
Key words: Civil litigation legitimacy Illegal evidence Major illegal Interest measure