Transparency of interim evidence assessment as a necessary condition for ensuring adversarial principle in civil proceedings
- Authors: Stolpovskih N.O.1
-
Affiliations:
- Voronezh State University
- Issue: Vol 11, No 4 (2024)
- Pages: 107-112
- Section: Private law
- URL: https://journal-vniispk.ru/2410-7522/article/view/286388
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/RJLS642392
- ID: 286388
Cite item
Abstract
Aim. The study aimed to substantiate the need to ensure transparency of the interim assessment of evidence performed by the court. This work criticizes the approach that allows discretion of the court when deciding whether to offer parties to the case to submit additional evidence. The arguments given by supporters of the passive role of the court in the process of assessing evidence are recognized as erroneous, since a public preliminary assessment of the reliability and sufficiency of evidence will not lead to a violation of the adversarial principle, but on the contrary, will provide conditions for its most complete implementation, will contribute to a comprehensive, complete and correct clarification of the case actual circumstances.
Conclusions. When considering a civil dispute, it is the court that should set the vector of evidentiary activity, determine the directions of collecting, examining and assessing evidence by disclosing the results of their interim assessment. The work proposes to amend the procedural legislation, namely to establish the court’s obligation to offer persons participating in the case to submit additional evidence if there are doubts about its reliability and (or) sufficiency.
Full Text
##article.viewOnOriginalSite##About the authors
Nikita O. Stolpovskih
Voronezh State University
Author for correspondence.
Email: n.stolpovskih@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0009-2957-3113
SPIN-code: 4906-1750
post-graduate student
Russian Federation, VoronezhReferences
- Kurylev SV. Selected Works. Minsk: Industrial and Commercial Law, 2012. 607 p. (In Russ.)
- Ejsman AA. Expert opinion. Structure and scientific justification. Moscow: Legal Literature; 1967. 152 p. (In Russ.)
- Trusov AI. Judicial proof in the light of cybernetics. In: Kudryavtsev VN, editor. Cybernetics and Law Issues. Moscow: Science; 1967. P. 20–35 (In Russ.)
- Kudryavcev VN., Ejsman AA. Cybernetics in the fighting crime. Moscow: Knowledge; 1964. 80 p. (In Russ.)
- Shevchenko IM. Standarts of proving. Arbitrazh and Civil Procedure. 2024;(4):23–28. EDN: TLHCNT doi: 10.18572/1812-383X-2024-4-23-28
- Nechaev VI. (ed.). Commentary to the Civil Procedural Code of the Russian Federation (article by article). Moscow: NORMA, 2008. 974 p. (In Russ.)
- Baulin OV. The burden of proof in civil cases. Moscow: Gorodets; 2004. 266 p. (In Russ.) EDN: RTAIGT
- Fogelson YuB. Sociological jurisprudence (standards of proof, compensation for harm to life and health). Statute. 2020;(1):159–170. EDN: HOJDFR
- Rether VV. Problems of implementation of the principle of adversarial proceedings in arbitration proceedings. Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation. 1999;(11):96–99.
- Bunya M. About judicial impartiality. Socialist legality. 1953;(7):31–35.
- Treushnikov MK. Forensic evidence. Moscow: Gorodets, 2004. 272 p. (In Russ.) EDN: QVSDUL
- Rossinskiy SB. Means of proving in criminal proceedings. Juridical Journal of Samara University. 2023;9(1):37–45. EDN: CPVQUV doi: 10.18287/2542-047X-2023-9-1-37-45 .
- Zhukov AA. Legal means of court influence on the procedural behavior of the parties in civil proceedings [dissertation]. Moscow; 2022. (In Russ.) EDN: MEJFJP [cited 2024 Dec 7] Available from: https://izak.ru/upload/iblock/b64/Kandidatskaya_dissertatsiya_AA_ZHukova.pdf
- Alieskerov M. The principle of competition and legal assistance in civil proceedings. Arbitrazh and Civil Procedure. 2006;(3):2–6. EDN: KWXUNV
Supplementary files
