پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,225 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,687 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,002,074 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 89,680,834 |
ماهیت اظهارات اشخاص ثالث در دادرسی و موانع پذیرش آن | ||
| مطالعات حقوق خصوصی | ||
| مقاله 8، دوره 52، شماره 1، فروردین 1401، صفحه 127-148 اصل مقاله (307.35 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jlq.2022.334839.1007616 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| حسن محسنی* 1؛ احمد نجفی2 | ||
| 1دانشیار گروه حقوق خصوصی و اسلامی دانشکدة حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران | ||
| 2دانشجوی دکتری حقوق خصوصی دانشگاه تهران (پردیس البرز) | ||
| چکیده | ||
| «اظهارات اشخاص ثالث» در دادرسی که اشکال گوناگون آن قابل فرض است، بعضاً بنا به خاستگاه‌های تاریخی خود در قوانین موضوعه، به‌نحو موردی تعریف و «معین» شده‌اند و در مقابل، تعداد بیشتری چارچوب ندارند و تعریف نشده و «نامعین»اند. «ارزش اثباتی» این اظهارات به معنی رابطة آنها با مدلول، از دو جنبة «منطقی» و «اعتباری» قابل مطالعه و تقسیم‌بندی است. از حیث منطقی، مبانی کاشفیت این اظهارات چه در معین و چه نامعین با یکدیگر تفاوتی نداشته و همگی ماهیتاً «امارات قضایی» و البته با درجه‌های متفاوت واقع‌نمایی‌اند؛ واقع‌نمایی‌ای که تحت شمول اصل اولیة قابلیت پذیرش قرار می‌گیرند و درصورتی‌که مفید علم و اطمینان متعارف برای دادرس باشند، در دعوا موثر خواهند بود؛ و از حیث اعتباری، بنا به موانع قانونی ناشی از مصالح قانونگذار ارزش اثباتی خود را با وجود قابلیت منطقی از دست می‌دهند. ازاین‌رو «قابلیت تقسیم‌بندی ارزش اثباتی اظهارات اشخاص ثالث معین و نامعین به منطقی و اعتباری و اصل قابلیت منطقی پذیرش اولیة این اظهارات به‌عنوان امارات قضایی و در نتیجه نقش انحصاری دادرس در ارزیابی منطقی این اظهارات و انحصار نقش مقنن در ایجاد موانع اعتباری» به‌عنوان نظریه‌ای کلی در این مقاله مطرح شده است. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| اظهارات اشخاص ثالث معین و نامعین؛ ارزش اثباتی منطقی و اعتباری؛ اماره و علم قضایی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Declaration of Third Parties in Proceedings and its Exceptions | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Hassan Mohseni1؛ Ahmad Najafi2 | ||
| 1Associate Professor of Private Law, Faculty of Law & Political Sciences, University of Tehran | ||
| 2PhD Student in Private Law, University of Tehran, Alborz Compus | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Abstract A human element outside the litigants who has information on the subject matter of the dispute is called a third party. In general, the statements by any person other than the plaintiffs or the judge hearing the case are called the "statements of third parties." Logically, this evidence in terms of nature and method can be the third party's information or comment on the fact or on the law, which is presented orally or in writing, whether on paper or digitally, in person at the court or outside the court. Manifestations of these statements are enumerated according to the historical and cultural roots in the positive law, which are referred to in this article as the statements of certain third parties. However, many of the examples that can be assumed are not covered in this article, and they are referred to here as indefinite third party statements. The relationship between these statements and the subject and the sentence can be examined and evaluated from two aspects. First, the logical relationship is the one that has traditionally been examined in the evidence of litigation. The purpose of this relationship actually refers to the manifestation and logical and rational reality of the evidence for the statements of third parties. Evidence is the product of the study of experimental sciences, including cognitive sciences, psychology, and so on. Second, the relationship between evidence and meaning, which is the new division proposed in this article. The purpose of this relationship, regardless of the logical aspects, is to look at the moral, cultural, social, and economicconsiderations for the legislature and the legal system. In this way, according to the mentioned purposes, the legislator sometimes does not onsider the logical relation between these statements and meanings and prevents the exercise of the probative power of the evidence. This article is methodologically fundamental because it seeks to provide a legal theory that can be offered on the probative value of third party statements as an important part of the evidence, taking into account the rationale and contractual links between these statements and the fact or law. Of course, the result of the present study can have a practical aspect. However, due to its direct relationship with theoretical issues and the fact that it is initially used in theoretical and scientific references and may even lead to the amendment of laws, Its relationship to the practical law is typically indirect. Hence, it is considered non-practical and theoretical in conventional classification. Also, the present article is an introduction to different types of third party statements and the current situation of their positive valuation in the Iranian legal system and a case study with the two main categories of legal systems, namely positive law and common law. How to deal with the legal systems under study with this type of evidence and provide as much analysis as possible of the causes and aspects of this type of view and its principles are also the purpose of this article. Therefore, in terms of data collection, the research method is to refer to sources to compile a so-called library study. The article first deals with the lack of uniform and logical aspects in the analysis of the probative value of various third-party statements, and secondly examines the irrelevant issue for the formal aspects of the probative value of third-party statements and its mechanical view, and thirdly examines the difference between reason and meaning in the Iranian legal system. It is obvious that any reform in legal approaches and judicial procedures in the Iranian legal system, which stems from its cultural and social roots, including Imami law, is not possible without considering its principles and finding relevant literature and correct justification of its statements. The present article is written with the approach of analyzing justified solutions in order to theorize the free system of evidence and critique the mechanical view of the probative value of evidence and accuracy in the nature of the principles of probative value and presenting a new classification of probative value and the statements of third parties should be examined on the basis of the principles of Imami law and the existing legal system in Iranian Procedural law. The questions examined in this article are as follows: 1- What rules can govern these statements in terms of probative value? 2- Are there any common rules that can be referred to as general rules? 3- Can the relationship between the reason for the statements of third parties and their meaning be examined from a contractual point of view? 4. How many types of statements of third parties are there in procedural law? 5- Is the evidence for the statements exclusively enumerated? 6. What is the relationship between the probative value of third party statements and the presumption and the knowledge of judge? 7- What do the traditional conditions related to the logical acceptance of third party statements have to do with the probative value of these statements? The hypotheses of this article are: 1- The types of statements of third parties are not exclusive. 2- The probative value of third party statements can be examined from both logical and contractual aspects. 3- The basic principle is to accept the logical probative value of all types of third party statements. 4- The probative value of all kinds of third party statements in Iranian law can be analyzed absolutely in the form of a judicial presumption. 5. The division of the probative value of the evidence and statements of third parties into logical and contractual makes it possible to make policies for the evidence and thus limit or prohibit the probative value of the statements of third parties regardless of their logical relationship with the meaning in terms of contractual aspect. In this article we achieved these goals: Providing the classification of probative value into rational and contractual, announcing the basic principle of rational acceptance of the probative value of third party statements, the ability to analyze all types of third party statements under the presumption and judge’s knowledge. Discussion of presumption as the basis and nature of probative value of different types of evidence by considering the relationship between judge's knowledge in probative value of evidences and rejecting the definition of judge's knowledge to personal science and criticizing the mechanical view on the probative value of third party statements has been our goal in this article. The definition of evidence and the presentation of the division of positive value into logical and contractual evidence are new approaches in the present article. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Definite and Indefinite Third Party Statements, Rational and Credit Positive Value, Statistics and Jurisprudence. | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
منابع
الف) فارسی و عربی
ب) خارجی
30. Bergland, David P (1973). “VALUE ANALYSIS IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE”, Law Review (Western State), No 1. 31. Herzog, Petere (1994). “The Probative Value of Testimony in Private Law”, 20th ed. 32. Oudin, Martin (2015). “Evidence in Civil Law”, France. Institute for Local Self Government and Public Procurement Maribor, www.lex localis.press/index.php/LexLocalisPress/catalog/book/2. 33.Terence, Anderson, David Schum, and Twining William (2005). " Analysis of Evidence". 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 576 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 792 |
||