It is known that article 2697 c.c. operates as a decision rule in allocating the ‘risk of non-proofing’ and places the burden of proof on the plaintiff to prove the constituent facts underlying his claim; while it will be the defendant’s burden to prove the modifying, impeding and extinguishing facts. The objective of this essay is to investigate the scope of these rules in the context of the revocation judgement following two research perspectives: the first concerns the distribution of the burden of proof, whereas the other allows the identification of the technical modalities for fulfilling it.
Filice, G., Azione revocatoria ordinaria e concorsuale. Profili di diritto probatorio, <<JUS>>, 2023; (3): 133-165 [https://hdl.handle.net/10807/313240]
Azione revocatoria ordinaria e concorsuale. Profili di diritto probatorio
Filice, Gabriele
2023
Abstract
It is known that article 2697 c.c. operates as a decision rule in allocating the ‘risk of non-proofing’ and places the burden of proof on the plaintiff to prove the constituent facts underlying his claim; while it will be the defendant’s burden to prove the modifying, impeding and extinguishing facts. The objective of this essay is to investigate the scope of these rules in the context of the revocation judgement following two research perspectives: the first concerns the distribution of the burden of proof, whereas the other allows the identification of the technical modalities for fulfilling it.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
