Dejan Bodul, Hana Porobija
{"title":"IZVOĐENjE DOKAZA VJEŠTAČENjEM U PARNIČNOM POSTUPKU: ostvaruju li se načela vladavine prava?","authors":"Dejan Bodul, Hana Porobija","doi":"10.46793/uvp21.975b","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper deals with the issues of control of court experts in civil proceedings by the court as well as the question of how much the civil court really manages the expertise. The analysis of the judicatures points to practical problems arising from expertise in civil proceedings, in parallel detecting the reasons for such problems in expert proceedings both in the Republic of Croatia and in the European Union. Individual characteristic cases from practice are the subject of qualitative research because the intention of the analysis was twofold. On the one hand, identify concrete examples of unethical behaviour, and on the other hand, use the method of abstraction and indicative method of establishing facts to point out to systematic gaps that may pose a risk of unethical behaviour in the justice sector, regardless of existing mechanisms to strengthen judicial integrity. For the purpose of the analysis, telephone interviews were conducted among judges, lawyers and court experts. The conducted interviews of targeted respondents serve to further verify the credibility of the results of this analysis. The collected data indicate practical problems in the implementation of certain legal solutions. The perspective of the interviewed interlocutors is based on the knowledge and experience gained in practice, which is certainly an important factor in assessing the improvement, but also the degree of optimization of the existing legal framework of the subject-matter complex of problems.","PeriodicalId":349295,"journal":{"name":"USLUGE i vladavina prava","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"USLUGE i vladavina prava","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46793/uvp21.975b","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了法院在民事诉讼中对法院专家的控制问题,以及民事法院在多大程度上真正管理专家的问题。对司法机关的分析指出了民事诉讼中由专门知识引起的实际问题,同时查明了克罗地亚共和国和欧洲联盟专家诉讼中出现这种问题的原因。由于分析的意图是双重的,因此来自实践的个别特征案例是定性研究的主题。一方面,确定不道德行为的具体例子,另一方面,使用抽象方法和确定事实的指示性方法指出可能在司法部门造成不道德行为风险的系统差距,而不管现有机制如何加强司法廉正。为了分析的目的,对法官、律师和法庭专家进行了电话采访。对目标受访者进行的访谈有助于进一步验证本分析结果的可信度。所收集的数据表明在执行某些法律解决办法方面存在实际问题。访谈对话者的视角是基于在实践中获得的知识和经验,这当然是评估改进的重要因素,也是对现有法律框架的主题复杂问题的优化程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
IZVOĐENjE DOKAZA VJEŠTAČENjEM U PARNIČNOM POSTUPKU: ostvaruju li se načela vladavine prava?
The paper deals with the issues of control of court experts in civil proceedings by the court as well as the question of how much the civil court really manages the expertise. The analysis of the judicatures points to practical problems arising from expertise in civil proceedings, in parallel detecting the reasons for such problems in expert proceedings both in the Republic of Croatia and in the European Union. Individual characteristic cases from practice are the subject of qualitative research because the intention of the analysis was twofold. On the one hand, identify concrete examples of unethical behaviour, and on the other hand, use the method of abstraction and indicative method of establishing facts to point out to systematic gaps that may pose a risk of unethical behaviour in the justice sector, regardless of existing mechanisms to strengthen judicial integrity. For the purpose of the analysis, telephone interviews were conducted among judges, lawyers and court experts. The conducted interviews of targeted respondents serve to further verify the credibility of the results of this analysis. The collected data indicate practical problems in the implementation of certain legal solutions. The perspective of the interviewed interlocutors is based on the knowledge and experience gained in practice, which is certainly an important factor in assessing the improvement, but also the degree of optimization of the existing legal framework of the subject-matter complex of problems.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信