Abstract: In 2019, China revised the Provisions by the Supreme People’s Court on  Evidence in Civil Procedures, and for the first time responded to the issue of “self-revocation of expert opinions” in Article 42. However, the provisions of this law are very weak, unable to provide effective guidance for the work of judicial departments, nor can it eliminate scholars’ disputes over whether appraisal opinions can be self-revoked. Based on this, for the issue of choosing or rejecting appraisal opinions, strict review and judgment should be made in accordance with the rules of evidence. The nature of the act of self-revocation of appraisal opinions should in principle be defined within the category of being invalid from the very beginning. The issue of revocation of appraisal opinions should be regulated with “non-revocation as the principle and revocation as an exception”. Meanwhile, at the current stage, laws and regulations should regulate on the circumstance of appraisal opinions revocation, provide a complete procedural solution path for courts to handle the situation where appraisal opinions are revoked in practice, and enable the issue of self-revocation of appraisal opinions to gradually mature in the development of practice and return to the field of evidence rules.

Key words: civil litigation, appraisal opinion, entrusted relationship, obstruction of litigation, legal regulation

摘要： 我国于2019年修改《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》，在第四十二条中首次回应“鉴定意见自行撤销”的问题。但该法条规定十分单薄，无法对司法实践部门的工作进行有效的指导，亦无法消弭学者对于鉴定意见是否可以自行撤销的争议。基于此，在鉴定意见的取舍问题上应严格遵照证据规则进行审查判断，将鉴定意见自行撤销行为的性质界定在原则上自始无效的范畴，对鉴定意见撤销问题进行以“不撤销为原则，撤销为例外”的规制。同时，现阶段法律法规要对允许撤销鉴定意见的情形进行规范，完善鉴定意见撤销后的法律后果，为实践中法院处理鉴定人撤销鉴定意见情形提供完善的程序解决路径，使鉴定意见自行撤销问题能在实践发展中逐渐成熟并回归到证据规则的领域。

关键词:  , 民事诉讼；鉴定意见；委托关系；诉讼妨碍；法律规制