Comments to article 64. Relevance of evidence of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan
Evidence is recognized by the court as relevant if it contains information about facts that confirm, refute, or cast doubt on conclusions about the existence of circumstances relevant to the case.This article defines which information about the facts is recognized as relevant evidence.The rule of relevance allows you to correctly determine the amount of evidentiary material, select only those proofs that are really needed to establish the factual circumstances of the case, and eliminate from the process all unnecessary, irrelevant, cluttering up the process. Compliance with the rule on the relevance of evidence in conjunction with other rules of admissibility (Article 65 of the CPC), reliability (Article 67 of the CPC) and sufficiency (Article 68 of the CPC) ensures a complete and objective determination of the circumstances of the case with the least effort and time.The relevance of evidence is a prerequisite for making a reasoned decision in which significant facts are confirmed by evidence (paragraph 5 of the Supreme Court's normative Resolution No. 5 of July 11, 2003 "On Judicial Decision"). Only those evidences that are directly relevant to the subject of the dispute and in their entirety are sufficient to establish the circumstances of the case, confirm or refute the arguments of the parties on the merits of the dispute should be examined at a court hearing.The relevance of evidence is defined in the legal literature as a feature of evidence, either as a property of evidence, or as a criterion for evaluating evidence. The relevance of evidence is related to its content, which consists in the existence of an objective relationship between the information about the fact and the sought fact. The absence of such a connection means that the information is not a consequence of reflecting the desired phenomena, events, and, therefore, cannot be used in the process of judicial evidence.The relevance of evidence is determined first and foremost, after which its admissibility, reliability and sufficiency are assessed. The irrelevant evidence is at the same time inadmissible.If the evidence is sufficient, some of the relevant evidence may be excluded by the court from the list of required or investigated. For example, if there are many eyewitness accounts of a traffic accident, the court has the right to limit itself to the testimony of several witnesses, whose reliability is beyond doubt, considering that the testimony of other persons about the same facts is irrelevant to the case.The relevant evidence may be excluded by the court from the examination of evidence in connection with the party's recognition of the facts of the other party., which is exempt from the need for further proof of these facts (part two of Article 79 of the CPC).The issue of the relevance of evidence is decided by the parties involved in the case and the court.According to Article 46 of the CPC, a person participating in the case has the right to express his opinion on the relevance of evidence: to substantiate the relevance of the evidence presented by him or another person, or to refute the relevance of the evidence with his arguments.
In some cases, the law obliges the person involved in the case to substantiate the relevance of the evidence, for example, when applying to the court for evidence (Article 70 of the CPC), or requesting assistance in obtaining evidence (part five of Article 73 of the CPC). Thus, in a request for assistance in obtaining evidence, along with other data, it should be indicated which circumstances relevant to the case can be established or refuted by this evidence. On the basis of these data, the court must determine whether the requested evidence is relevant, after which it resolves the issue of satisfying the petition or refusing to satisfy it.The final relevance of evidence to the case is determined by the court, which has the right not to grant a request for securing or requesting evidence (Article 195 of the CPC), or to reject certain evidence (part five of Article 226 of the CPC).For example, plaintiff T. She requested that the order to dismiss her be declared illegal, stating that she was an elected trade union employee and could not be dismissed without a reasoned opinion from the trade union body (paragraph 2 of article 26 of the Law "On Trade Unions"). In support of her claims, the plaintiff submitted a certificate from the public association "Trade Union of Workers" on the payment of wages to the plaintiff from November 2011 to August 2012. The defendant disputed this fact, believing that the disputed fact could be confirmed by the minutes of a trade union meeting or a meeting of the trade union committee on the election of the plaintiff to the trade union committee. The Court concluded that the certificate submitted by the plaintiff confirms that the plaintiff received wages during the specified period, but did not classify the plaintiff as an elected trade union26 employee. Consequently, the plaintiff has not proved that she is an elected trade union employee.Thus, the salary payment certificate was not recognized by the court as relevant evidence in support of a fact relevant to the case, namely, that the plaintiff is a member of elected trade union bodies._______________________26 Case No. 2-7605/12 was considered by the Petropavlovsk City Court No. 2.
The determination of the relevance of evidence is part of the assessment of evidence in accordance with the first part of Article 68 of the CPC.The relevance of evidence is sometimes difficult to determine when filing a claim. The court's refusal to accept the evidence as irrelevant to the case does not prevent the person participating in the case from re-filing a motion for investigation or requesting the same evidence. If the court does not satisfy the request for investigation and (or) the demand for evidence, the person participating in the case has the right to refer to this evidence in an appeal or protest (part two of Article 404 of the CPC). In this case, the court of appeal evaluates the submitted or requested evidence from the standpoint of relevance (part two of Article 413, part five of Article 420 of the CPC).Evidence is relevant if it simultaneously meets the following conditions:: contains information about the facts (see the commentary to Article 63 of the CPC); this information confirms, refutes, or calls into question conclusions about the existence of factual circumstances; these factual circumstances are relevant to the case (see commentary to Article 63 of the CPC).Evidence confirming or refuting the facts indicated in the disposition of the relevant rule of substantive law as conditions for its application, evidentiary facts, and procedural facts will be relevant.The relevant evidence confirms, that is, the conclusions about the existence of factual circumstances relevant to the case are recognized as correct and reliable. The relevant evidence may refute, that is, prove the falsity, the falsity of the statements of the persons involved in the case about the existence of factual circumstances relevant to the case.If the relevant evidence calls into question the truth of conclusions about the existence of factual circumstances, this means that further investigation of the evidence is necessary before confirming or refuting significant facts., since, according to paragraph 11 of the Supreme Court's normative resolution No. 5 of July 11, 2003 "On Judicial Decision", the decision cannot be based on assumptions about the circumstances of the case.
LIBRARY OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN
Astana, 2016
UDC 347 (574)
By 63
ISBN 978-601-236-042-4
Constitution Law Code Standard Decree Order Decision Resolution Lawyer Almaty Lawyer Legal service Legal advice Civil Criminal Administrative cases Disputes Defense Arbitration Law Company Kazakhstan Law Firm Court Cases
