Pomen in uporaba nevroznanstvenih odkritij v civilnem dokaznem pravu : doktorska disertacija

slovenian

doktorska dela

2021

»objectification of subjective«   civil law   evidential value   limitations   neurolaw   neuroscience   subjective facts

Univerza v Mariboru, Pravna fakulteta

The Doctoral Dissertation discusses the problem of »objectification of subjective« in civil evidence law. Legally relevant subjective facts are facts, of which (non)existence depends upon subjective experience of individuals, as a result of which »external observers« cannot experientially perceive them. In civil evidence law the main »external observer« is the court, that must, in order to reliably ascertain subjective facts, achieve their objectification. However, the existing methods of »objectification of subjective« are not entirely reliable. The author argues, that the use of neuroscientific discoveries can increase the reliability in ascertaining legally relevant subjective facts. Neuroscience has already taken its first steps in the field of objectifying pain, lie detection and other legally relevant subjective facts that are being ascertained in civil evidence law. The interdisciplinary field, in which neuroscientific questions interweave with legal and vice versa is called neurolaw. Without understanding both law and neuroscience, it is impossible to scientifically research the field of neurolaw. Therefore, the author discusses the basics of civil evidence law and neuroscience, with diving deep into its history, present and future, then passes onto the scientific research of the development of neurolaw as an interdisciplinary field of neuroscience and (civil evidence) law. He points out, that the use of neuroscientific discoveries in civil evidence law is not a revolution, but in fact, the evolution of law.    The use of neuroscientific discoveries in civil evidence law is based on adversarial and exceptionally inquisitorial principle. It is important to consider actual limitations when using neuroscientific discoveries in civil evidence law and legal limitations, which exist when using existent methods of »objectification of subjective« in civil evidence law, as well as legal limitations, that exist when using neuroscientific methods of »objectification of subjective« in criminal evidence law. Regardless of limitations – either actual or legal – neurolaw will not come to a dead end, but will evolve alongside further development of neuroscience. Further development will reduce faults of neuroscience and increase the reliability of its discoveries. After all, the interdisciplinary field of neuroscience and law already exists, neuroscientific discoveries are already becoming a part of objectification of legally relevant subjective facts.    The present Doctoral Dissertation is the first scientific work that studies the civil law aspects of the interweaving of law and neuroscience as a whole. The scientific discoveries reached in this dissertation have moved the boundaries of knowledge of the meaning and use of neuroscientific discoveries in civil evidence law and offers a quality starting point for further research.

08.08.2023