Can an insurance company's internal documents be used as evidence in a lawsuit?

Manual mode can not meet the needs of the development of the new situation, people need to use advanced production tools to improve the office efficiency of enterprises. Therefore, more and more enterprises began to use the OA system for office work, such as communication, seal, document issuance, approval, filing, a large number of meetings, employee leave, attendance, payroll announcements and so on through OA to complete. In the convenience of the office at the same time, there are more and more disputes. So, in the event of a dispute, the OA system in the correspondence and so on can be used as evidence? This is a problem that bothers many people. Article 63 of China's Civil Procedure Law provides that "there are the following kinds of evidence: documentary evidence; physical evidence; audio-visual materials; witness testimony; statements of the parties; appraisal conclusions; investigation transcripts." Our Criminal Procedure Law and Administrative Procedure Law also make similar provisions. China's civil procedure law does not have electronic evidence as an independent type of evidence, but according to certain characteristics of electronic evidence, in the law and judicial interpretation to give relatively vague provisions, mainly audio-visual materials and documentary evidence. oa system formed in the document information as electronic evidence in practice, the mainstream view is considered to be the category of documentary evidence. According to China's legal tradition of the definition of evidence of the original, OA system in the printouts of the document information belongs to the copy. China's supreme people's court "on the application of" Chinese people *** and national civil procedure law "a number of issues in the interpretation of" article 78 provides: "evidence material for the copy" in the litigation shall not be used as a basis for determining the facts; "on the implementation of" Chinese people *** and national civil procedure law "a number of issues in the interpretation of" article 53 provides: "the collection and retrieval of documentary evidence shall be the original". Therefore, the issue of originality constitutes an obstacle to the validity of electronic evidence. According to Article 64 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning Evidence in Administrative Litigation, EDI, e-mail and other data materials fixed or displayed on tangible carriers, the production and authenticity of which have been confirmed by the opposing party or proved by other effective means such as notarization, shall have the same probative effect as the originals. Therefore, the party only prints out the documents in the OA system and submits them as evidence, which is less credible. If the litigation can be obtained through the notary public, and produce a notarized document, or apply to the court for the preservation of evidence, which will greatly facilitate the judge to review the authenticity of the evidence, of course, if the other party to recognize the evidence submitted, the court will also be confirmed. Therefore, the author suggests, in the litigation, as far as possible will be the above evidence through the notary public, and try to collect other evidence to support, do not only list one of the evidence, the formation of a complete chain of evidence. And then achieve the purpose of winning the case.

Extended reading: insurance how to buy, which is good, hand to teach you to avoid the insurance of these "pits"