Nos últimos anos, a partir do surgimento da ideia de Estado Democrático de Direito, a moderna doutrina processualista passou a entender o processo não só como meio destinado à pacificação social, passando a encará-lo como mecanismo destinado a fazer valer garantias e direitos constitucionais e a alcançar a pacificação justa dos litígios. A partir deste novo contexto, verificou-se a limitação de alguns institutos processuais vigentes, que embora pudessem auxiliar na obtenção do escopo de pacificação, deixavam de resguardar ou de implementar, em alguns momentos, determinadas garantias constitucionais, o que prejudicava o fim último de acesso à ordem jurídica justa. Uma das limitações verificadas a partir da perspectiva publicista de processo corresponde à regra estática de distribuição dos encargos probatórios conforme a natureza dos fatos alegados, uma vez que esta deixava de observar eventual impossibilidade da parte em cumprir com seu encargo. Ante tal limitação, foi desenvolvida uma teoria destinada a reequilibrar a relação processual, assegurando a implementação das garantias constitucionais, quando a regra estática de distribuição dos encargos probatórios não se mostrava suficiente a assegurar o acesso à ordem jurídica justa. Denominada de distribuição dinâmica do ônus da prova (ou teoria das cargas probatórias dinâmicas) a teoria foi pensada a fim de, em tais situações e conforme as peculiaridades do caso concreto, determinar a redistribuição do encargo probatório a fim de que este recaia sobre as partes em melhores condições. Contudo, há grande divergência doutrinária sobre a viabilidade prática da distribuição dinâmica do ônus da prova, sendo apontados diversos problemas que podem decorrer de sua aplicação. O presente trabalho pretende contribuir com a análise do tema, a partir de um estudo sobre as razões que impuseram a criação do instituto, bem como as contribuições que sua implementação traz ao processo civil, encarado sobre a ótica de processo constitucional, e os riscos que podem decorrer de sua aplicação, de forma a verificar se existe viabilidade em sua aplicação e eventuais formas de se afastar os problemas apontados pelos críticos à teoria. / Over the past few years, with the raising of the idea of Democratic State of Law, the modern procedural doctrine has started to understand civil lawsuit not only as a mean to achieve social peace, starting to face it as a mechanism with an aim to reinforce constitutional rights and warranties and to achieve the pacification with Justice for disputes. From this new context, it was observed the limitation of certain current procedural institutes, that even though could help to achieve the pacification, wouldnt protect or carry into effect, at some circumstances, certain constitutional warranties, which would interfere with the definitive goal of providing access to a just legal order. One of the limitation verified after the public conception of civil procedure concerned the static rule for the distribution of the burden of proof, therefore the rule wouldnt take into account eventual impossibility of the party to fulfill the assignment. Regarding this limitation, it was developed a theory aiming to rebalance the procedural relation, carrying the constitutional warranties into effect, when the static rule for the distribution of the burden of proof wouldnt reveal to be sufficient to ensure the access to the just legal order. Therefore called the dynamic distribution of the burden of proof (or theory of the dynamic burden of proof) this theory has been developed to, at those said circumstances and according to the peculiarities of each case, determinate the replacement of the burden of proof attributing it to the party whith better means to fulfill the assignment. However, there is no theoretical agreement over the practical viability of the dynamic burden of proof, being pointed several problems that could result from its employment. The present research aims to contribute with this analysis, after the study over the reasons that impose the creation of this institute, as well as the contribution its implementation brings to civil procedure, looked from the constitutional procedure point of view, and the risks that could raise from its employment, as a way to verify if there is practical viability on its utilization and eventual forms to prevent the problems pointed by those who criticize the theory

The thesis topic is Duty of pleading and duty of proof in the contentious civil proceedings. The hereby stated obligations belong to the basic concepts of procedural law. If the interested party fulfils both obligations together with bearing the corresponding burdens, it increases its chance of success in a dispute. Supposing it was inactive, its inactivity might be reflected in the dispute result. My thesis aim was to deal with essential obligations in civil proceedings within eight chapters. In chapter one I mention historical excurcus where I introduce how the above stated obligations were adjusted in the previous civil procedural law regulations. It is only an outline of the historical development. Chapter two I briefly devote to the current concept - de lege lata. In the subsequent chapter three I deal with the burden of pleading and burden of proof in both types of declaratory proceedings namely in contentious and non-contentious proceedings. Where the contentious proceedings require higher activity of the interested parties in comparison with the interested parties in the non- contentious proceedings. Chapter four is focused on detailed description of both procedural obligations and to them corresponding burdens. Besides other various theories of burden of proof are stated here. And also...

As the globalization of companies increases day by day, the need for a clear and comprehensible legislation to overcome the problems with transfer pricing transactions increases as well. Incorrect pricing in transfer pricing situations between companies with close economic ties to each other makes countries risk parts of their taxation income. Swedish legislation uses the internationally accepted arm’s length principle to regulate the transfer pricing transactions. Through the correction rule, the rule is upheld that the pricing between two companies with close economic ties to each other must apply to the same conditions as it would have been if it was between two companies without close economic ties to each other. To ensure that enough material is provided to base the assumption whether or not the correction rule has been followed or not, Swedish legislation provides a number of paragraphs to regulate the matter. The legislation is spread all over and is hard to interpret. The question rises whether this is against the rule of legal certainty or not. The taxation authority has provided a proposition on new legislation with tougher documentation requirements where it also wants to give itself part of the power by through directions exactly define what the documentation shall include. Yet again the question is raised whether or not this is against the rule of legal certainty or not. / I takt med att globaliseringen av företag ökar, ökar också behovet av en klar och tydlig lagstiftning för att överkomma problemen med internprissättningstransaktioner. Vid oriktig prissättning vid transaktioner mellan företag i ekonomisk intressegemen-skap riskerar länder att gå miste om delar av sin skattebas. Svensk lagstiftning använder sig av den internationellt accepterade armlängdsprincipen för att reglera internprissättningstransaktioner. Genom korrigeringsregeln regleras att prissättningen mellan två företag i ekonomisk intressegemenskap måste ske under samma förutsättningar som skulle ha gällt mellan två företag utan ekonomisk intressegemenskap. För att få underlag till huruvida korrigeringsregeln har följts eller inte finns ett antal lagrum i svensk rätt som reglerar dokumentationskrav. Denna lagstiftning är spridd och anses vara svårtolkad. Frågan uppstår om detta strider mot rättsäkerheten. Skatteverket har kommit med ett förslag på ny lagstiftning med skärpta dokumentationskrav där man dessutom vill ge sig själv delar av makten att genom föreskrifter exakt bestämma vad dokumentationen skall innehålla. Återigen väcks frågan om det-ta är förenligt med rättssäkerheten.

<p>As the globalization of companies increases day by day, the need for a clear and comprehensible legislation to overcome the problems with transfer pricing transactions increases as well. Incorrect pricing in transfer pricing situations between companies with close economic ties to each other makes countries risk parts of their taxation income.</p><p>Swedish legislation uses the internationally accepted arm’s length principle to regulate the transfer pricing transactions. Through the correction rule, the rule is upheld that the pricing between two companies with close economic ties to each other must apply to the same conditions as it would have been if it was between two companies without close economic ties to each other.</p><p>To ensure that enough material is provided to base the assumption whether or not the correction rule has been followed or not, Swedish legislation provides a number of paragraphs to regulate the matter. The legislation is spread all over and is hard to interpret. The question rises whether this is against the rule of legal certainty or not.</p><p>The taxation authority has provided a proposition on new legislation with tougher documentation requirements where it also wants to give itself part of the power by through directions exactly define what the documentation shall include. Yet again the question is raised whether or not this is against the rule of legal certainty or not.</p> / <p>I takt med att globaliseringen av företag ökar, ökar också behovet av en klar och tydlig lagstiftning för att överkomma problemen med internprissättningstransaktioner. Vid oriktig prissättning vid transaktioner mellan företag i ekonomisk intressegemen-skap riskerar länder att gå miste om delar av sin skattebas.</p><p>Svensk lagstiftning använder sig av den internationellt accepterade armlängdsprincipen för att reglera internprissättningstransaktioner. Genom korrigeringsregeln regleras att prissättningen mellan två företag i ekonomisk intressegemenskap måste ske under samma förutsättningar som skulle ha gällt mellan två företag utan ekonomisk intressegemenskap.</p><p>För att få underlag till huruvida korrigeringsregeln har följts eller inte finns ett antal lagrum i svensk rätt som reglerar dokumentationskrav. Denna lagstiftning är spridd och anses vara svårtolkad. Frågan uppstår om detta strider mot rättsäkerheten.</p><p>Skatteverket har kommit med ett förslag på ny lagstiftning med skärpta dokumentationskrav där man dessutom vill ge sig själv delar av makten att genom föreskrifter exakt bestämma vad dokumentationen skall innehålla. Återigen väcks frågan om det-ta är förenligt med rättssäkerheten.</p>

There is unanimity within the arbitration community that corruption is disrupting international trade and that arbitrators must not let arbitration be a safe forum for enforcement of contracts tainted by such illicit acts. Due to the hidden nature of corruption, often hiding behind an agency agreement, the most challenging question facing arbitrators has shown to be how to handle the rules of evidence. Awards show that there is an inconsistency in the treatment of the burden and standard of proof as well as the significance given to circumstantial evidence. Two trends can be spotted where the first approach is to argue that the seriousness of the accusations calls for a heightened standard of proof. The second trend is to argue that the seriousness to the contrary calls for a pragmatic approach to the rules of evidence, allowing a less rigid view on the standard of proof and use of circumstantial evidence or even a shift in the burden of proof. The focus of the thesis is on evidentiary aspects of corruption cases and how arbitrators have dealt with these challenges. The overall question is how arbitrators should handle the rules of evidence in corruption cases from a lege ferenda perspective. It is argued that the inconsistency in the handling of proof is sometimes misguided and that there are reasons to agree on a common starting point for applying the rules of evidence to corruption cases. Arbitrators should realise the frightening fact that it is their weighing of the evidence which is usually decisive for the outcome and accordingly there is a responsibility to conduct this operation carefully. The tools and procedural flexibility to reveal corruption exist even if there is no perfect solution on how to do it.

SUMMARY Subsantial questions of legal regulation of burden of proof and the matter of proof in civil procedure are being discussed in this master‘s writing. The work deals both with disclosing the legal regulation of burden of proof and the matter of proof in actual civil procedure, and analyzing the main theoretical and practical aspects of these questions in more details. The structure of this work enables to reveal the essence of this theme. The work consists of two parts. Whereas from the begining of the civil procedure, first of all, it is important to define which facts are disputed in the particular civil case, therefore the first part of this work deals with revealing the legal regulation of matter of proof. The legitimate and right court judgement can be taken only if all factual circumstances of a case are established. In every civil case the court must be „on the balance of probabilities“ that the alleged facts exist. The first part of this work deals with the conceptions of matter of proof in civil procedure. Also analyze the theoretical and practical significance of establishing the factual circumstances in particular civil case. The further chapters of the first part reveals the essence of each group of the facts, which can be asserting in civil cases. As we already know the facts in dispute on an issue raised between the parties, the second important practical step - to allocate the burden of proof. The second part of this work reveals the conceptions of... [to full text]

In this thesis I scavenge the history of philosophy for answers to the question ‘How are claims to knowledge justified?’. I argue that Plato’s psychological doctrine of knowledge marks the starting point of a philosophical inquiry motivated by the possibility to discover foundations of knowledge through investigating the nature of mind. At the core of this inquiry lies the hypothesis that if the psychological mechanisms that govern the capacity for knowledge acquisition is fully understood, then answers will follow about why judgements are true or false. The prospective result of the inquiry is a theory of universal epistemic justification which demarcates epistemically warranted beliefs from unwarranted beliefs. I suggest that there is a historically persistent case of cognitive dissonance within the epistemological enterprise — a tension between two of its central theses — which is caused by the persistence of the of the hitherto unsuccessful but ongoing quest for universal epistemic justification, and its inciting promises. The contradicting theses are those of certain justification (that one is justified in believing that p only if p is entailed by evidence) and proportional justification (that one is proportionally justified in believing that p to the extent that evidence makes p credible). I discuss the consequences of giving up one of the respective theses. I conclude that the thesis of certain justification cannot be given up unless an adequate theory of proportional justification is proposed, and that the legacy of searching for universal epistemic justification will continue unless epistemologists are able to construct one.

Thesis (M.A.) - Carleton University, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 128-132). Also available in electronic format on the Internet.

In this interview, the outstanding Italian professors tell us their perspective on the main points of patrimonial civil law. In this way, the speakers explain matters related to the transfer of property system, breach of contract, tort, among others subjects; making brief comments, the authors also refer to the legislative options received in the Peruvian law. / En la presente entrevista, los destacados profesores italianos nos comentan su perspectiva en torno a puntos clave del derecho civil patrimonial. De esta forma, los ponentes tratan temas referidos a los sistema de transferencia de propiedad, incumplimiento del contrato, responsabilidad extracontractual, entre otros temas. Realizando breves comentarios, los autores también se refieren a las opciones legislativas acogidas en el ordenamiento peruano.

Thesis title: Burden of proof in civil procedure This paper deals with burden of proof. The aim of this thesis is to provide a broader framework for this burden, since it is absolutely crucial in order to form a proper understanding of this topic. The first chapter mentions principles that are common to all legal procedures and those that are applicable only within civil procedure. These general procedural principles need to be interpreted in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights, which is binding upon Czech law. They also serve as a tool for a deeper integration of European law. The principles that are only applicable within civil procedure are usually presented in pairs consisting of principles of opposite meaning and are never really used in their pure form. The second chapter deals with basic rules of Evidence. It mentions the definition of Evidence, it makes a clear distinction between logical methods of proving and procedural ones, followed by definition of the purpose of Evidence. It also mentions topics that do not need to be proven, since there is some type of presumption governing these issues or they are somehow known to the court. This chapter emphasizes tools that simplify the process of proving. It also defines basic terms of Evidence. It does not try to be a complex...