The principle of immediacy of the trial determines the mechanism for consideration and perception by the court of civil case materials. In accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure, the direct examination of the evidence of a case is entrusted to the courts of first instance.
Definition of the principle of immediacy
So, let's define the term “judicial immediacy”. That this is the basic principle of evidence-based activity, which establishes the truth of facts and information necessary for judicial review and informed decision-making, it became clear in Roman times. It consists of the following parts:
- The court bases its decision based solely on evidence examined during the trial , as this alone ensures the validity of the final sentence.
- Investigating the circumstances of the case, the court must obtain information from direct sources. In the process of reviewing the case, the trial courts should directly consider all available evidence: hear the testimonies of the persons participating in the case, testimonies, evidence of examinations, examine the material and familiarize themselves with the written evidence. It is these conditions that ensure the immediate trial and are the basis for making the right decision.
- When analyzing the evidence of a case by all parties to the process, judicial immediacy is necessarily used. What does this mean in practice? This means that the court is obliged to rely as much as possible in the court session on the initial evidence revealed during the direct action of certain events, such as information from witnesses, interrogations of victims and accused, data from examinations, information collected by the investigation and the defense.
The requirement of the principle of immediacy in the use of initial evidence does not mean at all that the derivative evidence that arose during the consideration of the case can be neglected. Derivative evidence may supplement or disprove the original.
Exceptions to the principle
Do not forget that in judicial practice there are cases when it is impossible or inappropriate to directly perceive factual information by the court.
In such cases, the judicial principle of immediacy has a number of exceptions provided for in the procedural Civil Code.
For example, in the absence of a witness or a person participating in the case at a court session for good reason, the court may issue a court order for interrogation at the place of residence or location.
A witness is interrogated at the place of stay only in case of failure to appear in court due to a disability or health condition that makes his personal presence impossible at the hearing. In this case, information for the court session shall be attached to the case by the relevant judicial records of the interrogation.
Cases of various evidence, such as questioning a witness, ordering and conducting expert examinations, demanding and studying material and written evidence before initiating a case and examining it on the merits, will be an exception to this principle. And in this case, it is the judge who will be the subject of direct perception, even when considering the case by a panel of judges.
Sole and peer review
The principle of immediacy of the trial ensures that decision-making will be based only on evidence obtained directly from sources of information, the evidence of which at the hearing was subjected to comprehensive verification.
When considering a case collegially from the beginning to the end of the process, the composition of the judges must remain unchanged. Sole consideration involves one judge for the duration of the trial. Only the judges who took part in the study of the circumstances of the case can participate in the process of making a procedural document based on the results of the review — a determination or decision —. Upon the satisfaction of the application for the recusal of the judge or the composition of the court or in the event of the judge (or one of the panel judges) leaving the trial for valid reasons (business trip, illness, etc.), the consideration of the current case begins from the very beginning. Otherwise, the new judge will not have all the necessary information to conduct the process, and judicial immediacy will not be respected. That this affects the validity of the final decision is clear to everyone.
The validity of court decisions
The Code of Civil Procedure in a separate article clearly defines what judicial immediacy is. That it is absolutely necessary for the independence of a judge in his assessments of the case from the position of the bodies of preliminary investigation and inquiry is proved by centuries-old judicial practice