PDF (Español (España))
FLIP
EPUB (Español (España))
HTML (Español (España))
XML (Español (España))
The content of the publications and the links suggested in them are the sole responsibility of the authors and not of the METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (UMECIT) or CATHEDRA magazine. They are protected by international copyright laws just as the UMECIT and CATHEDRA logos, hence their reproduction is totally prohibited
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The authors maintain the copyright and transfer the right of the first publication to the journal, with the article registered with Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which allow others They can download the works published in this magazine and share them with other people, as long as their authorship is recognized, but they cannot be changed in any way nor can they be used commercially.
Authors are recommended to include their work in social networks such as Researchgate and institutional repositories once the article or visible fact has been published on the journal page, without forgetting to include the digital document identifier and the name of the journal.
Abstract
The assurance of evidence has been conceived in our Code of Procedure as a precautionary measure, by conferring on the parties the possibility of obtaining evidence through an anticipated mechanism, which ultimately becomes an exception to the rule contained in Article 792 of the Judicial Code, which proposes that the evidence to be appreciated in a process requires a request to be practiced or incorporated into the process within the indicated terms.We say the above because the assurance of evidence as such a figure conceived within the title of evidence, when we are really facing an anticipated assurance measure, which only proceeds when any person wishes or intends to sue or fears that they may be sued, and provided that there is a justified fear that eventually a means of proof may be lacking, making it difficult or impracticable to obtain it in a timely manner. When you think about requesting the intervention of the judge in a specific matter, we imagine that it will be through a claim or by answering it, which is an imperfect or incomplete idea, since you can also go to the judge with the intention that collaborate in aspects that will contribute to the preparation of a future process, to that set of judicial activities, where the judge allows in advance to inspect the litigious thing or various evidentiary elements, it is called Exhibit Proceedings. There is no doubt that the proceedings have a precautionary justification of prior information, which brings with it the periculum in mora, therefore, it is considered by many authors as a precautionary measure.
Keywords:
References
Gil Vallejo, B. (2011). El aseguramiento de la prueba en el proceso civil y penal. Barcelona, Spain: J.M. Bosch Editor.
Mizrachi & Pujol, S.A. (2020). Código Judicial de la República de Panamá. Editorial M&P.
Mizrachi & Pujol, S.A. (2018) Constitución Política de la República de Panamá. Reformada al 2014. Editorial M&P.
Pico I Junoy, J. (2001). “La prueba anticipada en la nueva Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil” Revista Justicia 2001, No 2-4.
