Правова характеристика інституту доказів і доказування закордонних країн

Abstract

Проаналізовано положення нормативно-правових актів Франції, Німеччини, США, Англії, Білорусії та деяких інших країн, у частині функціонування інституту доказування в рамках господарського процесу. Реалізація потенціалу порівняльно-правового методу при вивченні основних правових систем дозволяє вийти на новий рівень накопичення й систематизації його результатів. Study evidentiary process the principal legal systems on the basis of methodological tools of comparative legal research acts as one of the directions of research. Realization of comparative legal method in the study of the principal legal systems to reach a new level of accumulation and systematization of the results. The accumulated potential, which is the greatest opportunity and the results of the theory of comparative legal studies in legal practice, particularly in the field of law-making and enforcement, is inexhaustible. Analyzed the provisions of legal acts in France, Germany, USA, England, Belarus and other countries in the functioning of the institute of proof in the framework of the economic process. The theoretical basis for the study were scientists and lawyers work in the field of evidence: V.V. Babenko, A.J. Wyszynski, A.G. Kovalenko, B.T. Matyushina, L.M. Nikolenko, I.V. Reshetnikov, T.V. Stepanova, M.K. Treushnikova, V.S. Chirkin and others. Analysis of the legislation of other countries allows to study the concepts, principles and ideas of another legal system. It is a way to develop and improve their own theory. The courts around the used comparative law in their activities and norms of international law, in assessing the results of procedural actions of another state. Thus, execution of court orders, collection of evidence, enforcement of foreign judgments is hard to imagine without a card with their legal system. Exchange of experience and cooperation are extremely important in the XXI century, because no country, however powerful it may be, can not exist in isolation from the rest of the world. Despite the variety of approaches to the formation of the institute of evidence and proof in different states, the process of development reached common principles of competition and achievement of objective truth in the trial.