The use of information obtained from “Google Maps” and “Yandex.Maps”, as evidence in the practice of arbitration courts of the Russian Federation
Автор: Shkurova P.D.
Журнал: Вестник Омской юридической академии @vestnik-omua
Рубрика: Гражданский процесс, арбитражный процесс
Статья в выпуске: 1 т.18, 2021 года.
Бесплатный доступ
The Author carries out an up-to-date study reflecting the possibility of providing other means of proof to an arbitration court, namely, information that can be obtained using free services “Google Maps” and “Yandex.Maps”. The judicial practice has been investigated, in which such means of proof meet all the evaluation criteria, and sometimes the photographs presented in the case materials are the only evidence that confirm certain circumstances of the case. An analysis of judicial practice in the arbitration process shows that photographs from Yandex.Maps and Google Maps are more often than others attached to the case materials when it is necessary to establish the presence of an object in a specific territory, including the periods of its presence. In relation to modern means of proof, the Author uses the term “unnamed evidence” to emphasize that the procedure for research and assessment of such evidence is not fully clear to the law enforcement officer and is not enshrined by the legislator. Since the current arbitration procedural legislation establishes an open list of means of evidence, and the law does not contain special instructions on the procedure for evaluating and examining such evidence (Part 2 of Article 64 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation), the term used may well be applicable to information received using the Google Maps and Yandex.Maps services. The latter, in turn, under certain conditions (after going through the process of proof) can be evidence in the case, confirming certain facts. The article concludes that there is a need to legally secure the order of research and assessment of “unnamed evidence”, which is also confirmed by judicial practice. The work also mentions the proposal of Rosreestr to create a unified database service for real estate objects. With a certain degree of objectivity and reliability, it seems that this proposal should be supported at the legislative level and implemented in the foreseeable future.
Arbitral proceedings, innominate evidence, information obtained through Google Maps and Yandex.Maps, means of proof
Короткий адрес: https://sciup.org/143176034
IDR: 143176034 | DOI: 10.19073/2658-7602-2021-18-1-83-91