Evidence is anything admitted in a court of law to prove or disprove the alleged matter of a fact in a trial. In the United States and France legal systems, pieces of evidence are allowed in the court’s progression. However, in the two, we have both similarities and differences in how evidence is treated within the litigation process. For instance, among the similarities, in litigation processes for both countries, parties concerned must submit relevant facts supporting their claims. In addition to this, they must have proof as per a country’s law. This will enable a court to be able to render a verdict fairly based on evidence provided. Also, the courts in both countries usually treat the collected evidence with confidentiality (Berg, 2015). This is whereby evidence from one party cannot be disclosed to another party before a trial. Thus, the courts usually allow efficient collection of pieces of evidence before trial but through legally permissible inquiries.
However, there are several differences between the two systems. In the US system, witnesses play a vital role in uncovering facts about a case. In contrast, the French court system rarely requires witnesses to provide evidence in civil proceedings. The French judges are believed not to trust witness testimony given "on the stand." They do not allow cross-examination of witnesses. Only the judge is allowed to ask questions based on his or her evidence (Garapon, 2011) . Also, in the US system, the courts require parties to disclose certain documents as pieces of evidence. In addition to this, they allow the gathering of witnesses who give testimony at the court of law. Parties are compelled to give evidence and failure to giving evidence; penalties are applied. In contrast, French courts do not oblige any party to disclose any particular documents as pieces of evidence (Paris, Foulon, Pouillaude & Sterck, 2019). Disclosure of evidence is voluntary. There are no penalties for failure to disclose certain documents. Any party is free to either disclose or withhold whatever documents they might have. In conclusion, the French litigation process turns out to be the best compared to the USA law of evidence. I will recommend the use of the French law where the court works with its evidence as compared to that of the US, where witness evidence may be a case’s determinant factor. Also, this aids in preventing the use of forged evidence in a court of law. As a result, a court will be able to render a verdict based on its fundamental knowledge of a case. Thus, it is advantageous as both parties will have equal chances of winning a case.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
References
Berg, R. K. (2015). Criminal Procedure: France, England, and the United States. DePaul L. Rev. , 8 , 256.
Paris, M. L., Foulon, J., Pouillaude, H. B., & Sterck, J. (2019). Constitutional Law in France . Kluwer Law International BV.
Garapon, A. (2011, August 22). France-United States: Two Different Ways to Reach Legal Truth . Retrieved from THE EUROPEAN INSTITUTE: https://www.europeaninstitute.org/index.php/87-documents/documents/1399-france-united-states-two-different-ways-to-reach-legal-truth-by-french-magistrate-antoine-garapon
