izpis_h1_title_alt

Dokaz z izvedencem
ID Bucik, Maja (Author), ID Kramberger Škerl, Jerca (Mentor) More about this mentor... This link opens in a new window

.pdfPDF - Presentation file, Download (744,35 KB)
MD5: 6942B6EBC6667610DB58410E4086FFC5

Abstract
Magistrsko delo se osredotoča na izvedenca kot dokazno sredstvo. Da bi lahko podrobneje proučili dokaz z izvedencem, se moramo najprej seznaniti z dokazovanjem v civilnem postopku na splošno. Zato so v prvem delu najprej predstavljena temeljna načela, ki pridejo v poštev v dokaznem postopku z izvedencem. Pomembne so tudi določbe o trditvenem in dokaznem bremenu, izvajanju dokazov ter njihovem ocenjevanju. V osrednjem delu se naloga osredotoča na izvedenca, tako da so najprej podane definicije in primerjave izvedenca z drugimi podobnimi instituti. Nato so navedeni pogoji za imenovanje sodnega izvedenca, kronološko predstavljena dejanja sodišča pri postavitvi izvedenca in opredeljene izvedenčeve dolžnosti. Če je izvedenec prezaseden ali neučinkovit oziroma nevesten, zakon določa različne ukrepe, ki so na razpolago sodišču in strankam postopka, kar je predstavljeno v nadaljevanju. Na koncu so obravnavane še nekatere dileme, ki se pojavljajo v povezavi z izvedenstvom v praksi.

Language:Slovenian
Keywords:dokazni postopek, načela dokazovanja, izvedenec, dileme izvedenstva
Work type:Master's thesis/paper
Organization:PF - Faculty of Law
Year:2019
PID:20.500.12556/RUL-111459 This link opens in a new window
COBISS.SI-ID:16968017 This link opens in a new window
Publication date in RUL:02.10.2019
Views:2044
Downloads:243
Metadata:XML RDF-CHPDL DC-XML DC-RDF
:
Copy citation
Share:Bookmark and Share

Secondary language

Language:English
Title:Evidence by an expert
Abstract:
Master's thesis focuses on evidence by an expert. In order to be able to study evidence by an expert in more detailed way, we must first understand evidentiary procedure in civil proceedings in general. Therefore, the first part sets out the basic principles that are relevant in evidentiary procedure with an expert. Provisions on burden of proof, the taking of evidence and their assessment are also important. In the central part, the thesis focuses on the expert, by first defining this notion and comparing the expert with other similar institutes. Then it sets out the conditions for the appointment of a court expert and identifies the expert’s duties. If the expert is overburdened or ineffective, the law provides for various measures at the disposal of the court and the parties. Finally, the thesis addresses some of the dilemmas that arise with regard to expert evidence in practice.

Keywords:evidentiary procedure, principles of evidence taking, expert, dilemmas regarding evidence by an expert

Similar documents

Similar works from RUL:
Similar works from other Slovenian collections:

Back