Tres lecturas de la buena fe procesal
Good faith is a key part in the justice. This paper outlines three conceptually different ways to understand the procedural good faith in modern litigation: a strong thesis (to contribute to the justice of the case), a minimal thesis (not to litigate with malice) and a more than minimal thesis (to f...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Idioma: | Castellano |
| Publicado: |
Universidad Diego Portales: Fundación Fernando Fueyo Laneri
2013
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=5095685 |
| Fuente: | Revista chilena de derecho privado, ISSN 0718-0233, Nº. 21, 2013, pags. 259-308 |
| Etiquetas: |
Añadir etiqueta
Sin etiquetas: Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro
|
| Sumario: |
Good faith is a key part in the justice. This paper outlines three conceptually different ways to understand the procedural good faith in modern litigation: a strong thesis (to contribute to the justice of the case), a minimal thesis (not to litigate with malice) and a more than minimal thesis (to fulfill with certain duties of collaboration and procedural burdens). Each approach entails dissimilar implications for the parties, third parties and the court itself. This analysis demonstrates that good faith understood as a more than minimal threshold is the one that is best suited to a process where private and public interests must be balanced. To establish the best distribution of the burdens and duties in the litigation is a priority (but not exclusive) task in the procedural literature. |
|---|