Advanced

Det svenska kravet - en studie de lege feranda över beviskravet och bevisbördan i dispositiva tvistemål

Birkaskog, Joel LU (2020) JURM02 20202
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to discuss probability threshold and the burden of proof in dispositive litigation in Swedish law de lege feranda. The current evidentiary requirement in civil cases is considered to be proven or proven, which means a relatively high probability requirement. Regarding what is the prevailing main rule for the burden of proof prevails, disagreement within the doctrine where many different theories abound. The study proposes a new type of probability threshold and burden of proof, namely Edward K. Cheng's reconceptualized burden of proof. This probability threshold is based on looking at how the parties' versions relate to each other, where the version that is more probable compared to the other version is the one... (More)
The purpose of this study is to discuss probability threshold and the burden of proof in dispositive litigation in Swedish law de lege feranda. The current evidentiary requirement in civil cases is considered to be proven or proven, which means a relatively high probability requirement. Regarding what is the prevailing main rule for the burden of proof prevails, disagreement within the doctrine where many different theories abound. The study proposes a new type of probability threshold and burden of proof, namely Edward K. Cheng's reconceptualized burden of proof. This probability threshold is based on looking at how the parties' versions relate to each other, where the version that is more probable compared to the other version is the one that the court must follow in its sentencing proceedings. The theories behind this proof requirement are the Bayesian method and the decision method, both of which are mathematical probability theories.

By looking at basic principles of the dispositive dispute, such as the principle of the adversarial procedure, the disposition principle, the principle of free trial and the principle of immediacy, it is concluded that its purpose is that the dispositive dispute is a strongly party-dominated dispute and that the question of evidence consists entirely of how the parties have jointly defined it. The study argues that Cheng's reconceptualized burden of proof are much better adapted to this purpose and basic idea, than the prevailing probability threshold. Finally, it is argued that the reconceptualized burden of proof makes other theories regarding burden of proof completely irrelevant, but that there are times when these theories can be used arrive at modifications of the burden of proof. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Syftet med detta arbete är att kritiskt diskutera beviskrav och bevisbörda i dispositiva tvistemål i svensk rätt de lege feranda. Det nu rådande beviskravet i tvistemål anses vara styrkt eller visat, vilket innebär ett relativt högt sannolikhetskrav. Gällande vad som är den rådande huvudregeln för bevisbörda råder, oenighet inom doktrinen där många olika teorier florerar. I arbetet föreslås en ny typ av beviskrav, nämligen Edward K. Chengs rekonceptualicerade beviskrav. Detta beviskrav går ut på att man ser till hur partsversionerna förhåller sig till varandra, där den version som är mer sannolik jämfört med den andra versionen är den som domstolen ska utgå efter i sin dömande verksamhet. Teorierna bakom detta beviskrav är den bayesianska... (More)
Syftet med detta arbete är att kritiskt diskutera beviskrav och bevisbörda i dispositiva tvistemål i svensk rätt de lege feranda. Det nu rådande beviskravet i tvistemål anses vara styrkt eller visat, vilket innebär ett relativt högt sannolikhetskrav. Gällande vad som är den rådande huvudregeln för bevisbörda råder, oenighet inom doktrinen där många olika teorier florerar. I arbetet föreslås en ny typ av beviskrav, nämligen Edward K. Chengs rekonceptualicerade beviskrav. Detta beviskrav går ut på att man ser till hur partsversionerna förhåller sig till varandra, där den version som är mer sannolik jämfört med den andra versionen är den som domstolen ska utgå efter i sin dömande verksamhet. Teorierna bakom detta beviskrav är den bayesianska metoden och beslutsmetoden, som båda är matematiska sanno-likhetsteorier.

Genom att se till grundläggande principer hos det dispositiva tvistemålet, så som principen om det kontradiktoriska förfarandet, dispositionsprincipen, principen om fri processföring och omedelbarhetsprincipen, dras slutsatsen att dess syfte och grundläggande idé går ut på att det dispositiva tvistemål är en starkt partsdominerad tvist, där bevisfrågan helt utgörs efter hur parterna tillsammans har definierat den. I arbetet argumenteras för hur Chengs rekon-ceptualiserade beviskrav är mycket bättre anpassat till detta syfte och grundläggande idé, än vad rådande beviskrav är. Slutligen argumenteras för att det rekonceptualiserade beviskravet gör bevisbördan helt ovidkommande, men att det finns tillfällen då nu rådande bevisbördeteorier kan implementeras för att komma fram till modifikationer av beviskravet. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Birkaskog, Joel LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
The Swedish requirement - a study del lege feranda regarding evidentiary requirements and burden of proof in civil ligitagations
course
JURM02 20202
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Allmän rättslära, Bayesiansk metod, bevisrätt, beviskrav, bevisbörda, decision theory, Bayes teorem
language
Swedish
id
9034620
date added to LUP
2021-01-27 09:55:05
date last changed
2021-01-27 09:55:05
@misc{9034620,
  abstract     = {The purpose of this study is to discuss probability threshold and the burden of proof in dispositive litigation in Swedish law de lege feranda. The current evidentiary requirement in civil cases is considered to be proven or proven, which means a relatively high probability requirement. Regarding what is the prevailing main rule for the burden of proof prevails, disagreement within the doctrine where many different theories abound. The study proposes a new type of probability threshold and burden of proof, namely Edward K. Cheng's reconceptualized burden of proof. This probability threshold is based on looking at how the parties' versions relate to each other, where the version that is more probable compared to the other version is the one that the court must follow in its sentencing proceedings. The theories behind this proof requirement are the Bayesian method and the decision method, both of which are mathematical probability theories.

By looking at basic principles of the dispositive dispute, such as the principle of the adversarial procedure, the disposition principle, the principle of free trial and the principle of immediacy, it is concluded that its purpose is that the dispositive dispute is a strongly party-dominated dispute and that the question of evidence consists entirely of how the parties have jointly defined it. The study argues that Cheng's reconceptualized burden of proof are much better adapted to this purpose and basic idea, than the prevailing probability threshold. Finally, it is argued that the reconceptualized burden of proof makes other theories regarding burden of proof completely irrelevant, but that there are times when these theories can be used arrive at modifications of the burden of proof.},
  author       = {Birkaskog, Joel},
  keyword      = {Allmän rättslära,Bayesiansk metod,bevisrätt,beviskrav,bevisbörda,decision theory,Bayes teorem},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Det svenska kravet - en studie de lege feranda över beviskravet och bevisbördan i dispositiva tvistemål},
  year         = {2020},
}