Access to evidence in private international law

Theoretical Inquiries in Law 23 (1):77-96 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This Article analyzes the interaction between the burden of proof and evidentiary discovery rules. Both sets of rules can affect incentives for prospective injurers to invest in evidence technology. This interaction becomes acutely important in the private international law setting, where jurisdictions are split on the question whether the burden of proof should be treated as a substantive or procedural matter. When a tort occurs in Europe, but the case is litigated in American courts, treating the burden of proof as a procedural matter preserves the complementarity of incentives created by the burden of proof and evidentiary rules. Conversely, treating the burden of proof as a substantive matter creates a mismatch in incentives created by the burden of proof and evidentiary rules.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

On Effect of Private International Law in Contemporary International Relations.Jian Sun - 2006 - Nankai University (Philosophy and Social Sciences) 4:118-125.
Can Brain Imaging Breach Our Mental Privacy?Amihud Gilead - 2015 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 6 (2):275-291.
Polish private international law.Andrea Bonomi, Paul Volken & Petar Sarcevic - 2005 - In Andrea Bonomi, Paul Volken & Petar Sarcevic (eds.), Yearbook of Private International Law: Volume Vi. Sellier de Gruyter.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-02-02

Downloads
14 (#846,545)

6 months
3 (#445,838)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references