Umestitev elektronskih dokazov med dokazna sredstva pravdnega postopka

Abstract

Svojevrstna narava elektronskih dokazov botruje k temu, da jih ne moremo jasno in enostavno umestiti med eno izmed vrst tradicionalnih dokaznih sredstev, ki jih predvideva Zakon o pravdnem postopku (ZPP). Elektronski dokazi so po svoji naravi zapisani na elektronskem nosilcu in so tako v izvorni obliki neberljivi, zaradi česar se za izvedbo dokaza elektronske narave zahteva ustrezno znanje in uporaba tehnoloških pripomočkov. Ker trenutna normativna ureditev dokaznih pravil v ZPP posebej ne ureja posebnosti elektronskih dokazov, se elektronske dokaze po analogiji umešča med tradicionalna dokazna sredstva pravdnega postopka. Med katera dokazna sredstva se umeščajo, ZPP ne daje izrecnega odgovora. Vsled temu je namen prispevka proučitev, med katera dokazna sredstva umeščamo najpogostejše vrste elektronskih dokazov in ali je trenutna ureditev glede na svojevrstnost elektronskih dokazov ustrezna.

Keywords

elektronski dokazi;dokazna sredstva;pravdni postopek;umestitev elektronskih dokazov;listina;ogled;

Data

Language:	Slovenian
Year of publishing:	2024
Typology:	1.16 - Independent Scientific Component Part or a Chapter in a Monograph
Organization:	UM PF - Faculty of Law
UDC:	347.95
COBISS:	182170883
Parent publication:	Studia Iuridica Miscellanea
Views:	0
Downloads:	3
Average score:	0 (0 votes)
Metadata:

Other data

Secondary language:	English
Secondary title:	Classification of electronic evidence between means of proof of contentious civil procedure
Secondary abstract:	The peculiar nature of electronic evidence contributes to the fact that electronic evidence cannot be clearly categorised among the traditional means of proof provided by the Slovenian Contentious Civil Procedure Act (CCPA). Electronic evidence is stored on an electronic medium and, therefore, is not directly readable. For this reason, the presentation of electronic documents requires technical knowledge and technical devices. The current normative regulation of evidentiary rules in the CCPA lacks a special regulation for electronic evidence; as a result, they are, by analogy, applied among the traditional means of proof of contentious civil proceedings. The CCPA does not state explicitly how they are classified as means of proof. Consequently, the purpose of the contribution is to examine which means of proof are applicable to the most common types of electronic evidence and whether the current regulation, considering the peculiarity of the electronic evidence, is appropriate.
Secondary keywords:	illegally obtained evidence;the right to evidence;rights in conflict;the principle of proportionality;practical concordance;civil litigation;
Pages:	Str. 97-122
DOI:	10.18690/um.pf.1.2024.4
ID:	27111691