Electronic evidence in the civil procedure of foreign countries (on the example of the European Union, Switzerland, Ukraine)

The relevance of the study is due to the growing interest in the scientific community in the problems of electronic evidence as independent sources of obtaining information in the framework of litigation, caused, in turn, by the constantly intensifying processes of digitalization through the development of computer and information and communication technologies.

Digital documents have many advantages over paper documents, in particular in terms of frequency and speed of processing, as well as storage capacity, which together allows us to talk about the implementation of the principle of procedural economy in the framework of civil proceedings.

The aim of the study is to review and analyze the experience of foreign law and order in the field of legal regulation of electronic means of evidence in order to study the possibility of its application in modern conditions of the domestic legal environment in the framework of civil and arbitration proceedings. To solve the set tasks, the author identifies and describes the characteristic features of the legal consolidation of the object of research in a number of jurisdictions of continental Europe (EU, Switzerland, Ukraine).

Based on the results of the comparative legal study of the institute of electronic evidence, it is concluded that their legal nature differs from the essence of other means of proof, in particular, written and material evidence. In turn, the above fact leads to the need to study the possibility of legislative consolidation of electronic evidence as independent means of proof in the context of the national legal system of Russia. As part of the development of this issue, it is proposed:

― to consolidate the legal definition of the concept of "electronic evidence" by introducing relevant articles into the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation (Article 71¹) and the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation (Article 75¹);

― establish criteria for the recognition of relevant information as electronic evidence;

― within the framework of procedural codes, fix the list of the main types of electronic evidence, while leaving it open for operational perception within the framework of procedural legislation;

― work out the possibility of mandatory involvement of a specialist as a person assisting in the study of electronic evidence.

1. Danielyan A.S., Konovalova A.N. On the question of the legal nature of electronic evidence in the context of civil and arbitration procedure// Kuban agency of judicial information pro-sud-123.ru: legal network electronic scientific journal. 2021. № 1 (12). Pp. 50-60.

2. Kotlyarova V.V. On the problems of legal regulation of electronic evidence in the civil procedure // Arbitration and civil process. 2019. № 6. Pp. 37–42.

3. Potapenko S.V., Pavlov E.A. Digital rights in the system of objects of civil rights // Legal Bulletin of the Kuban State University. 2021. №. 2. Pp. 9–14.

4. Chvankin S.A. Audio and video recordings as a type of electronic evidence in the civil procedure// Theory and practice of law. 2018. Vol. 2. Pp. 1–17.

5. Dholam S. Electronic evidence and its challenges // URL: http://mja.gov.in/Site/Upload/GR/Title%20NO.129(As%20Per%20Workshop%20List%20title%20no129%20pdf).pdf.

6. Fanger R. Digitale Dokumente als Beweis im Zivilprozessrecht. Doctoral Thesis. Basel, 2005.

7. Gasser C. Digital Evidence in the New Swiss Federal Code of Civil Procedure Digital // Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review. 2009. Vol. 6. Pp. 194– 196.

8. Gasser C. Electronic legal correspondence in Switzerland: the latest developments // Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review. 2014. Vol. 11. Pp. 25– 28

9. Gasser C., Peters S. Submission of Evidence Through Digital Documents in Swiss Civil Litigation // Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review. 2006. Vol. 3. Pp. 84–88.

10. Hörnle J. Cross-border Internet Dispute Resolution. Cambridge, 2009.

11. Hörnle J. Encouraging Online Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in the EU and Beyond // European Law Review. 2013. Vol. 38 (2). Pp. 187–208.

12. Jokubauskas R., Świerczyński M. Is revision of the council of Europe guidelines on electronic evidence already needed? // Utrecht Law Review. 2020. 16 (1). Pp. 13–20.

13. Mason S., Rasmussen U. The Use of Electronic Evidence in Civil and Administrative Law Proceedings and Its Effect on the Rules of Evidence and Modes of Proof: A Comparative Study and Analysis. Strasbourg. 2016. // URL: https://rm.coe.int/1680700298.

14. Schafer B. & Mason S. The characteristics of electronic evidence. Electronic Evidence / S. Mason & D. Seng (Eds.). London: University of London Press, 2017. Pp.18–35.

15. The New Swiss Civil Procedure Code // URL: https://www.vischer.com/fileadmin/uploads/vischer/Documents/Activities/Brosch_CPC_EN_Web.pdf.

16. Weir George R.S., Mason S. The Sources of Electronic Evidence. ElectronicEvidence / Ed. byMason S. andSeng D. London, 2017. Pp. 1–17.