This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of judicial and legal concentration of proceedings, particularly focusing on evidence taking. The principle of concentration of proceedings, which aims to optimize procedural steps, is central to this study. By ensuring that all relevant objections, evidence, and arguments are presented at a predetermined stage of the process—whether by statutory requirements or judicial discretion—the principle seeks to enhance procedural efficiency and fairness. The paper examines both statutory concentration, mandated by law, and judicial concentration, applied at the judge's discretion. The analysis explores how these mechanisms contribute to the procedural economy, prevent unnecessary delays, and motivate litigating parties to fulfill their procedural duties promptly. Furthermore, the paper discusses the historical development of concentration principles in Slovak law, the impact on procedural obligations, and the balance between procedural strictness and flexibility. The findings highlight the importance of concentration in achieving timely and effective judicial rulings while maintaining the legal guarantees of a fair trial.
{"title":"Judicial and legal concentration of proceedings in the context of evidence-taking","authors":"Iveta Lajošová","doi":"10.5219/legestic.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5219/legestic.10","url":null,"abstract":"This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of judicial and legal concentration of proceedings, particularly focusing on evidence taking. The principle of concentration of proceedings, which aims to optimize procedural steps, is central to this study. By ensuring that all relevant objections, evidence, and arguments are presented at a predetermined stage of the process—whether by statutory requirements or judicial discretion—the principle seeks to enhance procedural efficiency and fairness. The paper examines both statutory concentration, mandated by law, and judicial concentration, applied at the judge's discretion. The analysis explores how these mechanisms contribute to the procedural economy, prevent unnecessary delays, and motivate litigating parties to fulfill their procedural duties promptly. Furthermore, the paper discusses the historical development of concentration principles in Slovak law, the impact on procedural obligations, and the balance between procedural strictness and flexibility. The findings highlight the importance of concentration in achieving timely and effective judicial rulings while maintaining the legal guarantees of a fair trial.","PeriodicalId":503689,"journal":{"name":"Legestic","volume":"16 S1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141375502","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The academic paper analyses some interpretation problems associated with assessing unlawful evidence. In current legal practice, one of the most significant and debated issues in court proceedings is handling the evidence obtained. This question is all the more complex when the court finds itself in a situation where it has to decide on the admissibility and relevance of the evidence obtained unlawfully. A pressing question then is: How should the court deal with evidence obtained in violation of the law? Is it possible for such evidence to be recognised as admissible and to influence the decision on the merits, or is it the court's duty to reject such evidence unreservedly?
{"title":"An unlawfully obtained vs. unlawfully taken evidence in civil litigation","authors":"Iveta Lajošová","doi":"10.5219/legestic.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5219/legestic.9","url":null,"abstract":"The academic paper analyses some interpretation problems associated with assessing unlawful evidence. In current legal practice, one of the most significant and debated issues in court proceedings is handling the evidence obtained. This question is all the more complex when the court finds itself in a situation where it has to decide on the admissibility and relevance of the evidence obtained unlawfully. A pressing question then is: How should the court deal with evidence obtained in violation of the law? Is it possible for such evidence to be recognised as admissible and to influence the decision on the merits, or is it the court's duty to reject such evidence unreservedly?","PeriodicalId":503689,"journal":{"name":"Legestic","volume":" 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141374818","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The paper focuses on the issue of legal regulation of unions of same-sex couples under the conditions of the Slovak legal order. The author notes that within the Slovak Republic there is no equivalent of the institution of marriage for cohabiting persons of the same sex. It is further specified on the issues of recognition of marriages of same-sex couples, respectively registered partnerships established abroad. The aim of the contribution is to summarize and stimulate a wider discussion on the issues addressed and to point out the fact that human rights must be guaranteed in a state of law, while their guarantee can be interpreted as a security granted to all and the rejection of discrimination. The lack of legal recognition for same-sex unions not only presents social challenges but also practical hindrances in daily affairs such as healthcare, taxation, and social security benefits, which can often be predicated on marital status. It is crucial to consider the implications of such legal gaps on the well-being of individuals who are part of same-sex couples, as well as their children. The evolving social fabric and changing attitudes towards same-sex relationships necessitate a reassessment of existing legal frameworks to ensure inclusivity and equality under the law. The continued efforts and discussions within the Slovak Republic highlight a growing awareness and potential for legislative change that aligns with the European consensus on human rights. Moreover, the exploration of legal avenues for recognition of same-sex unions must consider the dynamic nature of family structures in the contemporary context, where diversity in family units is becoming increasingly normative.
{"title":"Legal union of a same-sex couple in the Slovak Republic and the scope of recognition of such unions validly established abroad","authors":"Veronika Václavová","doi":"10.5219/legestic.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5219/legestic.7","url":null,"abstract":"The paper focuses on the issue of legal regulation of unions of same-sex couples under the conditions of the Slovak legal order. The author notes that within the Slovak Republic there is no equivalent of the institution of marriage for cohabiting persons of the same sex. It is further specified on the issues of recognition of marriages of same-sex couples, respectively registered partnerships established abroad. The aim of the contribution is to summarize and stimulate a wider discussion on the issues addressed and to point out the fact that human rights must be guaranteed in a state of law, while their guarantee can be interpreted as a security granted to all and the rejection of discrimination. The lack of legal recognition for same-sex unions not only presents social challenges but also practical hindrances in daily affairs such as healthcare, taxation, and social security benefits, which can often be predicated on marital status. It is crucial to consider the implications of such legal gaps on the well-being of individuals who are part of same-sex couples, as well as their children. The evolving social fabric and changing attitudes towards same-sex relationships necessitate a reassessment of existing legal frameworks to ensure inclusivity and equality under the law. The continued efforts and discussions within the Slovak Republic highlight a growing awareness and potential for legislative change that aligns with the European consensus on human rights. Moreover, the exploration of legal avenues for recognition of same-sex unions must consider the dynamic nature of family structures in the contemporary context, where diversity in family units is becoming increasingly normative.","PeriodicalId":503689,"journal":{"name":"Legestic","volume":"10 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140258531","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：