EVIDENCE LAW AS THE ELEMENT OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM

Abstract

In the science of civil procedural law, there is considerable interest in the study of evidence law. In some cases, the evidence law is considered purely in the sense of the subjective right to prove the circumstances of the case but most researchers have attempted to determine the place of evidence law in the general system of law. However, the conclusionson this point are very different; the evidence law is proposed to be considered as both a legal institute, and as a branch of law, and as an independent formation. To characterize evidence law, it is necessary to determine what legal rules are parts of it, how they are interconnected, and how they are involved in the proving. This will provide a basis for answering the question of the place of evidence law in the system of law.Evidence law is, first and foremost, rules of procedural law which establish the procedure for proving at all stages of it, determine the basic requirements under which procedural actions aimed at establishing the circumstances of a case must be made. The connection between the evidence law and the procedural law is obvious but proving in civil cases is directly influenced by substantive law.Rules of substantive law are the basis for the formation of the subjectmatter of proof. From these rules follows the main content of the evidentiary activity in the case and the relevance of evidence submitted to confirm the claims and objections of the participants in the case. Providing the form of committing certain transactions, the procedure for issuing various kinds of documents, the competence of different bodiesto make certain decisions, the substantive law rules help to determine the admissibility of the means of proof. They also establish legal presumptions that affect the distribution of the circumstances to be proven between the parties to the case, the legal status of judicial experts, the procedure for conducting judicial examinations and the requirements for expert opinions. Therefore, the evidentiary activity in civil cases cannot be carried out with the application of the rules of civil procedural law only and requires the application of the rules of substantive law.Despite this, unlike procedural law, substantive law does not contain any rule which is applicable in every civil case. The subject-matter of the case, the relevance of the evidence, and the substantive element of its admissibility are largely derived from substantive law, in each case being quite different legal provisions. That is, while some rules of procedural law, in particular, Art. 76-81, 83, 89 of the CPC are applicable in proving in all civil cases, there is no universal rule of substantive law whichwould be involved in proving in every case without exception. Rules of procedural law regulate proving directly by establishing the rights and obligations of the subjects of proving, specific rules and procedures for the submission, investigation and evaluation of evidence. The rules of substantive law are included in proving selectively, their action is always individual and contextual in nature and limited to the resolution ofindividual issues. Therefore, it seems that the effect of the rules of substantive and procedural law in proving is as follows: the order of proving is governed by the rules of procedural law, and substantive law creates the preconditions for proving.The rules of procedural and substantive law in evidence law are combined in a complex, rather than systematic way, since the set of these rules is not characterized by the construction inherent in the system. The set of these rules is not peculiar to the unity of the object and method of legal regulation, commonality in the use of the same institutions and reciprocity of influence, so evidence law does not belong to any of theelements of the system of law. This is a legal phenomenon, an independent complex formation which is based on the rules of procedural law and is characterized by a special order of application of substantive law.