
handle: 10256/27401
This paper adopts the principles of the rationalist conception of evidence and examines the requirements that precautionary measures must—or should—meet in civil proceedings. First, it questions the use of plausibility as a “standard” to establish the fumus boni iuris, proposing instead its replacement with a mitigated probability threshold. Second, with regard to periculum in mora, the need to adjust certain elements of evidentiary reasoning (inductive probability) is addressed, proposing a differentiated theoretical framework for the assessment of evidence concerning propositions about future events (statistical probability). Finally, the study examines the particular nature of precautionary error as a special type of judicial error. Given the instrumental, provisional, and urgent nature of precautionary measures, any proposal for a precautionary standard must take into account non-epistemic factors, such as the severity of the measure, the available information, the procedural stage, and the legal interests at stake
Este trabajo asume los postulados de la concepción racional de la prueba y analiza los requisitos que deben o deberían cumplir las medidas cautelares en el proceso civil. Primero, se cuestiona la verosimilitud como “estándar” para acreditar el fumus boni iuris, proponiendo sustituir la verosimilitud por una probabilidad atenuada. Segundo, para el periculum in mora, se plantea la necesidad de ajustar ciertos elementos del razonamiento probatorio (probabilidad inductiva), proponiendo un marco teórico diferenciado para el tratamiento de la prueba de proposiciones respecto de hechos futuros (probabilidad estadística). Finalmente, se aborda la particularidad del error cautelar como tipo especial de error judicial: dada la naturaleza instrumental, provisional y de urgencia de las medidas cautelares, una propuesta de estándar cautelar debe considerar elementos no epistémicos para su determinación, tales como la gravedad de la medida, la información disponible, el estado del procedimiento y los bienes jurídicos involucrados
16
Procediment civil, Error judicial , Càrrega de la prova, Civil procedure, Burden of proof, Judicial error
Procediment civil, Error judicial , Càrrega de la prova, Civil procedure, Burden of proof, Judicial error
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
