One of the difficult problems of the theory and practice of Russian law is the definition of "subject of proof."The difficulty lies in the fact that there is no legal definition, indicating that it is.Only articles of procedural law states that the court determines what the circumstances relevant to the case, and what - no.
The practice of
If not given a clear idea what the practice is always the path of development, which tends to go on all the legislation in general.Subject proof contains the content side, it is the source on which the Court is guided.First of all, the substantive rules that govern the relevant relationship.In addition, an important role are the cause of action and the return.With these structures and concluded, how to determine what is to be investigated in a particular case.
subject of proof in a criminal trial
clear that the characteristics of the process dictate the differences between civil and criminal proceedings.In a criminal case the subject of proof is always the same, there is no direct relation to the circumstances of the case.There are some compounds that fall out of this rule.But at its core has always proved the same thing.For a start it concerns a crime.This includes the place, the way the commission of a wrongful act, there may be other circumstances.Then the wine is determined by the motive of the offender.To differentiate the penalty, you must gather information about the identity of the person who committed the act, as well as other circumstances which may be relevant.It is important to establish the extent of damage.In addition, the investigating authorities detect and conditions, and the reasons that may have contributed to the commission of a particular crime.
subject of proof in civil proceedings
It has its own specifics.Unlike criminal law, civil subject of proof is always different.It depends on the specific circumstances and due to the peculiarities of the different categories of cases.There are core and non-core (optional) facts which you want to install.The absence of the first, or their erroneous application entails the abolition of the sentence.For example, to moral harm was charged, you need to there were grounds for it, which are listed in the law.As for the other facts, among researchers and practitioners, a dispute arose as to whether or not they are the subject of proof.It turns out that in this case it is necessary to carry alone the extent to which the proceedings.This view seems to be the most appropriate.In addition, it is necessary to speak about the importance of procedural facts, as well as validation, without which formed the subject of the final proof.In general terms, verification provisions enable us to determine the accuracy of a particular event, act or document.Thus, on the basis of this is the formation of a final decision, which is formulated in the reasoning of the court.
