Dialettica probatoria e terzietà del giudice

Translated title of the contribution: [Autom. eng. transl.] Evidence dialectics and the third party of the judge

Giulio Ubertis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

[Autom. eng. transl.] The process, directed to the application of the law in the concrete case and taking place within a linguistic universe, implies a hermeneutical activity concerning the reconstruction of the fact not only for the necessary link between quaestio facti and quaestio iuris, but also for the need to understand the imputation and allegations of part, as well as the formulations and evidential evaluations. In it, the verification of the statement that forms the basis of the judicial request is fulfilled with the cadences of a probative dialectic both external (in which the contradictory occurs) and internal. This concerns the rational criteria of verisimilitude, relevance and relevance for admission to evidence, guaranteeing the methodological neutrality of the judge, who must not adhere to any research hypothesis during the instruction.
Translated title of the contribution[Autom. eng. transl.] Evidence dialectics and the third party of the judge
Original languageItalian
Pages (from-to)293-305
Number of pages13
JournalJUS
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Keywords

  • Adversary system
  • Ammissione probatoria
  • Contraddittorio
  • Dialettica probatoria
  • Evidence admission
  • Evidentiary dialectics
  • Judicial truth
  • Methodological neutrality of the judge
  • Neutralità metodologica del giudice
  • Verità giudiziale

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of '[Autom. eng. transl.] Evidence dialectics and the third party of the judge'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this