Įrodinėjimo našta ar pareiga

Abstract

The duty of the burden of proof has been traditionally used in the legal doctrine of the civil procedure, court practice, and in the Code on Civil Procedure of the Republic of Lithuania. This concept is firmly established in both the legal doctrine of civil procedure and in court practice; however, the legitimacy of using the duty of the burden of proof in civil procedure processes remains the object of discussion. The study aims to assess if the usage of the concept is compatible with party disposition and competition principles, and if the understanding of the concept is the same under substantive and procedural law due to the specific nature of the legal procedures. The article also addresses the influence on the burden of proof of the duty not to hinder the implementation of the civil procedure process and the prohibition to abuse the procedural rights. The analysis shows that the requirement for the party to provide sufficient evidence in support of its position must be defined by the concept of the “burden of proof”. The use of coercion in the averment procedure is rare, because each party has the right to define the extent of the realization of the burden of proof duty, while procedural sanctions are not imposed for the improper usage of the burden of proof.