近年来,我国法学界和司法工作者在纠正“重实体、轻程序”现象的同时,产生了过分强调程序公正的倾向,并导致司法裁判不公现象的增多。从实证的角度看,程序公正是实体公正的基础和前提,实体公正是程序公正的依归和检验标准,二者相互依存、相互促进。程序公正与实体公正是一致的,但有时也会产生冲突,这时,法官就要根据价值衡量来决定取舍,不能简单地一律程序公正优先,也不能把实体公正作为惟一的追求。从我国的实际情况出发,在民事诉讼实务中要实现裁判的实体公正,必须在民事裁判结果中体现法律和情理的统一,以取得裁判法律效果和社会效果的统一,实现法律公正与社会主流正义观的统一。 In recent years, the legal circles and judicial workers in our country have corrected the “heavy entity, light procedure” phenomenon, at the same time, they have tended to over emphasize procedural fairness and led to an increase in the unfairness of judicial adjudication. From an empirical point of view, procedural fairness is the foundation and premise of substantive justice. Entity fairness is the basis for the fairness of procedure and the test criterion. The two are interdependent and mutually reinforcing. Procedural justice is consistent with substantive justice, but conflicts sometimes occur. Judges then decide on trade-offs based on the measurement of value. They can not simply and unanimously give priority to procedural fairness, and they can not regard substantive justice as the sole pursuit. According to the actual situation in our country, in order to realize the substantive justice of the referee in the practice of civil litigation, we must unify the law and reason in the result of civil referee so as to unify the legal effect and the social effect of referee, and realize the justice of law and the justice of social mainstream Unity of view