Logo Oapen
  • Search
  • Join
    • Deposit
    • For Librarians
    • For Publishers
    • For Researchers
    • Funders
    • Resources
    • OAPEN
    • For Librarians
    • For Publishers
    • For Researchers
    • Funders
    • Resources
    • OAPEN
    View Item 
    •   OAPEN Home
    • View Item
    •   OAPEN Home
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Evidence in Civil Law - France

    Thumbnail
    Download PDF Viewer
    Author(s)
    Oudin, Martin
    Language
    English
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    The French Law of evidence is at the crossroad between procedural law and civil law. As part of the procedural law, it is governed by general principles set out by the Code de procédure civile, such as the contradictory principle, the principle of public hearing or the free disposition principle, which means that the parties define the framework of the proceeding and that the judge cannot base his decision on facts that were not put forward by the parties themselves. It is also the Code de procédure civile that organises the respective roles of the judge and the parties for the taking of evidence: since 1976, it imposes a – rather complex – balance between adversarial and inquisitorial principles. Other general principles were set by case law, e.g. the principle that no one can pre-constitute evidence in his own favour or the principle of fair evidence. On the other hand, more substantive rules are to be found in the Code civil. These rules mix two systems, the system of the preuve morale, applicable in some specific litigation, and the system of the preuve légale, which is clearly dominant in civil litigation. In the first system, evidence is in principle free, which means not only that any mode of proof is admissible, but also that assessment of evidence by the judges is free. In the second one, only determined means of evidence are admissible and their probative force is often set out by law. A majority of evidence rules derive more or less directly from this summa divisio. In fact, the predominance of the preuve légale system has made the French system of evidence rather rigid, in particular regarding the exaggerated importance of written evidence.
    URI
    http://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/31999
    Keywords
    inquisitorial principle; burden of proof; written evidence; free disposition principle; adversarial principle; iura novit curia; testimonial evidence; orality; fair evidence; contradictory principle; standard of proof; Civil procedure; Court of Cassation (France); France; Law of France; Letters rogatory; LexisNexis; Napoleonic Code; Relevance (law)
    DOI
    10.4335/978-961-6842-48-8
    ISBN
    9789616842488
    OCN
    945783135
    Publisher
    Institute for Local Self-Government and Public Procurement Maribor
    Publication date and place
    2015
    Series
    Law & Society,
    Classification
    Political structure and processes
    Pages
    55
    Public remark
    Relevant Wikipedia pages: Burden of proof (law) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(law); Civil procedure - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_procedure; Court of Cassation (France) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_of_Cassation_(France); France - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France; Law of France - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_France; Letters rogatory - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letters_rogatory; LexisNexis - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LexisNexis; Napoleonic Code - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_Code; Relevance (law) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relevance_(law)
    Rights
    https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
    • Imported or submitted locally

    Browse

    All of OAPENSubjectsPublishersLanguagesCollections

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Export

    Repository metadata
    Logo Oapen
    • For Librarians
    • For Publishers
    • For Researchers
    • Funders
    • Resources
    • OAPEN

    Newsletter

    • Subscribe to our newsletter
    • view our news archive

    Follow us on

    License

    • If not noted otherwise all contents are available under Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)

    Credits

    • logo EU
    • This project received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 683680, 810640, 871069 and 964352.

    OAPEN is based in the Netherlands, with its registered office in the National Library in The Hague.

    Director: Niels Stern

    Address:
    OAPEN Foundation
    Prins Willem-Alexanderhof 5
    2595 BE The Hague
    Postal address:
    OAPEN Foundation
    P.O. Box 90407
    2509 LK The Hague

    Websites:
    OAPEN Home: www.oapen.org
    OAPEN Library: library.oapen.org
    DOAB: www.doabooks.org

     

     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Differen formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    A logged-in user can export up to 15000 items. If you're not logged in, you can export no more than 500 items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.