Burdens of Proof in Medical Civil Liability Based on Doctrine and Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice
Introduction: this article is the result of a research project with the same name conducted by the research group Legal Hermeneutics of the research line Legal Analysis in the School of Legal and Political Sciences at the Universidad Autónoma de Bucaramanga (unab), Colombia. Methodology: the researc...
- Autores:
-
Santos-Ballesteros, Iván
Ortiz-Arciniegas, Emma
Ruiz-Alarcón, Ruth
- Tipo de recurso:
- Article of journal
- Fecha de publicación:
- 2016
- Institución:
- Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia
- Repositorio:
- Repositorio UCC
- Idioma:
- spa
- OAI Identifier:
- oai:repository.ucc.edu.co:20.500.12494/9047
- Acceso en línea:
- https://revistas.ucc.edu.co/index.php/di/article/view/1291
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12494/9047
- Palabra clave:
- Rights
- openAccess
- License
- Derechos de autor 2016 Dixi
| id |
COOPER2_afb2d1801d98509d730126541f655d73 |
|---|---|
| oai_identifier_str |
oai:repository.ucc.edu.co:20.500.12494/9047 |
| network_acronym_str |
COOPER2 |
| network_name_str |
Repositorio UCC |
| repository_id_str |
|
| dc.title.eng.fl_str_mv |
Burdens of Proof in Medical Civil Liability Based on Doctrine and Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice |
| dc.title.spa.fl_str_mv |
Las cargas probatorias en la responsabilidad civil médica a partir de la doctrina y la jurisprudencia de la Corte Suprema de Justicia |
| dc.title.por.fl_str_mv |
As cargas probatórias na responsabilidade civil médica a partir da doutrina e da jurisprudência da Suprema Corte de Justiça |
| title |
Burdens of Proof in Medical Civil Liability Based on Doctrine and Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice |
| spellingShingle |
Burdens of Proof in Medical Civil Liability Based on Doctrine and Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice |
| title_short |
Burdens of Proof in Medical Civil Liability Based on Doctrine and Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice |
| title_full |
Burdens of Proof in Medical Civil Liability Based on Doctrine and Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice |
| title_fullStr |
Burdens of Proof in Medical Civil Liability Based on Doctrine and Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Burdens of Proof in Medical Civil Liability Based on Doctrine and Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice |
| title_sort |
Burdens of Proof in Medical Civil Liability Based on Doctrine and Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice |
| dc.creator.fl_str_mv |
Santos-Ballesteros, Iván Ortiz-Arciniegas, Emma Ruiz-Alarcón, Ruth |
| dc.contributor.author.none.fl_str_mv |
Santos-Ballesteros, Iván Ortiz-Arciniegas, Emma Ruiz-Alarcón, Ruth |
| description |
Introduction: this article is the result of a research project with the same name conducted by the research group Legal Hermeneutics of the research line Legal Analysis in the School of Legal and Political Sciences at the Universidad Autónoma de Bucaramanga (unab), Colombia. Methodology: the research conducted is descriptive with documentary review techniques; the deductive method is used. Its general objective is to analyze the doctrine and case law evolution of the Civil Division of the Supreme Court of Justice in terms of burden of proof in medical liability proceedings for the period between 1990 and 2014. It is noteworthy that, regarding the demonstration of the de facto assumption of the rules containing the legal effct they pursue in medical liability proceedings, there is a question about whether the burden of proof belongs to the plaintif (static burden of proof) or to the party who is in the best condition to bring in evidence or clarify the facts of the dispute, whether plaintif or defendant (dynamic burden of proof). Results and conclusions: the answer to the said legal problem is given by the evolution of two pronouncements by the Supreme Court of Justice, referred to for their analysis as line founder (Judgment of March 5, 1940) and Archimedean (Judgementof November 14, 2014) |
| publishDate |
2016 |
| dc.date.accessioned.none.fl_str_mv |
2019-05-14T21:03:04Z |
| dc.date.available.none.fl_str_mv |
2019-05-14T21:03:04Z |
| dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-04-01 |
| dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
Artículo |
| dc.type.coar.fl_str_mv |
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1 |
| dc.type.coar.none.fl_str_mv |
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 |
| dc.type.coarversion.none.fl_str_mv |
http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 |
| dc.type.driver.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| dc.type.redcol.none.fl_str_mv |
http://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ART |
| dc.type.version.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
| format |
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 |
| status_str |
publishedVersion |
| dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.ucc.edu.co/index.php/di/article/view/1291 10.16925/di.v18i23.1291 |
| dc.identifier.uri.none.fl_str_mv |
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12494/9047 |
| url |
https://revistas.ucc.edu.co/index.php/di/article/view/1291 https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12494/9047 |
| identifier_str_mv |
10.16925/di.v18i23.1291 |
| dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
spa |
| language |
spa |
| dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.ucc.edu.co/index.php/di/article/view/1291/1327 |
| dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
Derechos de autor 2016 Dixi |
| dc.rights.accessrights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| dc.rights.coar.none.fl_str_mv |
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 |
| rights_invalid_str_mv |
Derechos de autor 2016 Dixi http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 |
| eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
| dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
| dc.publisher.spa.fl_str_mv |
Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia |
| dc.source.eng.fl_str_mv |
DIXI; Vol 18 No 23 (2016) |
| dc.source.spa.fl_str_mv |
DIXI; Vol. 18 Núm. 23 (2016) |
| dc.source.por.fl_str_mv |
DIXI; v. 18 n. 23 (2016) |
| dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
2357-5891 0124-7255 |
| institution |
Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia |
| repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositorio Institucional Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia |
| repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
bdigital@metabiblioteca.com |
| _version_ |
1814247298364866560 |
| spelling |
Santos-Ballesteros, IvánOrtiz-Arciniegas, EmmaRuiz-Alarcón, Ruth2016-04-012019-05-14T21:03:04Z2019-05-14T21:03:04Zhttps://revistas.ucc.edu.co/index.php/di/article/view/129110.16925/di.v18i23.1291https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12494/9047Introduction: this article is the result of a research project with the same name conducted by the research group Legal Hermeneutics of the research line Legal Analysis in the School of Legal and Political Sciences at the Universidad Autónoma de Bucaramanga (unab), Colombia. Methodology: the research conducted is descriptive with documentary review techniques; the deductive method is used. Its general objective is to analyze the doctrine and case law evolution of the Civil Division of the Supreme Court of Justice in terms of burden of proof in medical liability proceedings for the period between 1990 and 2014. It is noteworthy that, regarding the demonstration of the de facto assumption of the rules containing the legal effct they pursue in medical liability proceedings, there is a question about whether the burden of proof belongs to the plaintif (static burden of proof) or to the party who is in the best condition to bring in evidence or clarify the facts of the dispute, whether plaintif or defendant (dynamic burden of proof). Results and conclusions: the answer to the said legal problem is given by the evolution of two pronouncements by the Supreme Court of Justice, referred to for their analysis as line founder (Judgment of March 5, 1940) and Archimedean (Judgementof November 14, 2014)Introducción: el presente artículo constituye un resultado del proyecto de investigación del mismo nombre, el cual se desarrolla en el grupo de investigación Hermenéutica Jurídica de la línea de investigación Análisis Jurídico, de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad Autónoma de Bucaramanga (unab). Metodología: tiene como objetivo analizar la evolución doctrinal y jurisprudencial de la Sala Civil de la Corte Suprema de Justicia sobre la carga de la prueba en los procesos de responsabilidad médica, en el periodo comprendido entre 1990 y el 2014, con referencia a esta última. Es necesario señalar que, sobre la demostración del supuesto de hecho de las normas que consagran el efecto jurídico que ellas persiguen en procesos de responsabilidad médica, surge el interrogante en torno a si la carga probatoria le corresponde a la parte demandante (carga probatoria estática) o bien, a la parte que está en mejores condiciones para aportar las evidencias o esclarecer los hechos de controversia, ya sea demandante o demandado (carga probatoria dinámica). Resultados y conclusiones: la respuesta la da la evolución en dos de los pronunciamientos de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, denominadas para su análisis como fundadora de línea (Sentencia del 5 de marzo de 1940) y arquimédica (Sentencia del 14 de noviembre de 2014)Introdução: o presente artigo constitui um resultado do projeto de pesquisa do mesmo nome, o qual se desenvolve no grupo de pesquisa Hermenêutica Jurídica da linha de pesquisa Análise Jurídica, da Faculdade de Ciências Jurídicas e Políticas da Universidad Autónoma de Bucaramanga (unab), Colômbia. Metodologia: a pesquisa realizada é de tipo descritivo, com técnicas de revisão de documentos; emprega-se o método dedutivo. Tem como objetivo geral analisar a evolução doutrinal e jurisprudência da Sala Civil da Suprema Corte de Justiça sobre a carga da prova nos processos de responsabilidade médica, no período compreendido entre 1990 e 2014. É necessário apontar que, sobre a demonstração da hipótese formulada das normas que consagram o efeito jurídico que elas perseguem emprocessos de responsabilidade médica, surge o interrogante em torno de se a cargaprobatória corresponde à parte demandante (carga probatória estática), ou bem, à parte que se encontra em melhores condições para contribuir com evidências ou esclarecer os fatos de controvérsias, seja demandante, seja demandado (carga probatória dinâmica). Resultados e conclusões: a resposta ao anterior problema jurídico vem dada pela evolução de dois dos pronunciamentos da Suprema Corte de Justiça, denominados para sua análise, como fundadora de linha (Sentença de 5 de março de 1940) e arquimédica (Sentença de 14 de novembro de 2014)application/pdfspaUniversidad Cooperativa de Colombiahttps://revistas.ucc.edu.co/index.php/di/article/view/1291/1327Derechos de autor 2016 Dixiinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2DIXI; Vol 18 No 23 (2016)DIXI; Vol. 18 Núm. 23 (2016)DIXI; v. 18 n. 23 (2016)2357-58910124-7255Burdens of Proof in Medical Civil Liability Based on Doctrine and Case Law of the Supreme Court of JusticeLas cargas probatorias en la responsabilidad civil médica a partir de la doctrina y la jurisprudencia de la Corte Suprema de JusticiaAs cargas probatórias na responsabilidade civil médica a partir da doutrina e da jurisprudência da Suprema Corte de JustiçaArtículohttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85info:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttp://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ARTinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionPublication20.500.12494/9047oai:repository.ucc.edu.co:20.500.12494/90472024-07-16 13:26:01.521metadata.onlyhttps://repository.ucc.edu.coRepositorio Institucional Universidad Cooperativa de Colombiabdigital@metabiblioteca.com |