Las  cargas probatorias en la responsabilidad civil médica a partir de la doctrina y la jurisprudencia de la Corte Suprema de Justicia

Iván Santos Ballesteros; Emma Ortiz Arciniegas; Ruth Ruiz Alarcón

doi:10.16925/di.v18i23.1291

Burdens of Proof in Medical Civil Liability Based on Doctrine and Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice

Derecho Constitucional

https://doi.org/10.16925/di.v18i23.1291

Iván Santos Ballesteros Ver Biografía

Universidad Autónoma de Bucaramanga, UNAB

Emma Ortiz Arciniegas Ver Biografía

Universidad Autónoma de Bucaramanga, UNAB

Ruth Ruiz Alarcón Ver Biografía

Universidad Autónoma de Bucaramanga, UNAB

Introduction: this article is the result of a research project with the same name conducted by the research group Legal Hermeneutics of the research line Legal Analysis in the School of Legal and Political Sciences at the Universidad Autónoma de Bucaramanga (unab), Colombia. Methodology: the research conducted is descriptive with documentary review techniques; the deductive method is used. Its general objective is to analyze the doctrine and case law evolution of the Civil Division of the Supreme Court of Justice in terms of burden of proof in medical liability proceedings for the period between 1990 and 2014. It is noteworthy that, regarding the demonstration of the de facto assumption of the rules containing the legal effct they pursue in medical liability proceedings, there is a question about whether the burden of proof belongs to the plaintif (static burden of proof) or to the party who is in the best condition to bring in evidence or clarify the facts of the dispute, whether plaintif or defendant (dynamic burden of proof). Results and conclusions: the answer to the said legal problem is given by the evolution of two pronouncements by the Supreme Court of Justice, referred to for their analysis as line founder (Judgment of March 5, 1940) and Archimedean (Judgement
of November 14, 2014)

Keywords: Dynamic burden of proof, static burden, procedural burden, doctrine, legal establis hment, judgments of the Supreme Court of Justice

Antonio Michelli. La carga de la prueba. Mundo Editores. (1982).

Carlos Ignacio Jaramillo. La culpa y la carga de la prueba en el campo de la responsabilidad médica. Grupo Editorial Ibáñez. (2010).

Consejo de Estado. Sección Tercera. Sala de lo Contencioso Administrativo. Sentencia del 30 de julio de 1992. (m.p. Daniel Suárez Hernández; Julio 30 de 1992).

Corte Constitucional de Colombia. Sentencia C-020 de 1995. (m.p. María Victoria Calle; Enero 21 de 2015).

Corte Suprema de Justicia. Sala Civil y Agraria. Sentencia del 5 de marzo de 1940. (m.p. Liborio Escallón).

Corte Suprema de Justicia. Sala de Casación Civil. Auto de fecha 17 de septiembre de 1985.

Corte Suprema de Justicia. Sala Civil y Agraria. Expediente N.o 5507. (m.p. José Fernando Ramírez; Enero 30 de 2001).

Corte Suprema de Justicia. Sala Civil y Agraria. Sentencia del 13 de septiembre de 2002. (m.p. Nicolás Bechara Simancas).

Corte Suprema de Justicia. Sala de Casación Civil y Agraria. Expediente 2002-00373-01. (m.p. William Namén; Enero 25 de 2008).

Corte Suprema de Justicia. Sala Civil y Agraria. Sentencia del 22 de julio de 2010. (m.p. Pedro Octavio Cadena Munar).

Corte Suprema de Justicia de Colombia. Sala de Casación Civil. Expediente 2005-00025-01. (m.p. Arturo Solar-te; Noviembre 5 de 2013).

Corte Suprema de Justicia. Sala Civil y Agraria. Sentencia del 15 de septiembre de 2014. (m.p. Margarita Cabello Blanco).

Corte Suprema de Justicia. Sala de Casación Civil y Agraria. Radicación: 11001-31-03-029-2008-00469-01. (m.p. Fernando Giraldo Gutiérrez; Noviembre 14 de 2014).

Enrico Tullio Liebman. Manual de Derecho Procesal Civil. Ediciones Jurídicas Europa América. (1980).

Francisco Carnelutti. La prueba civil. Niceto Alcalá-Za-mora y Castillo, Trad. Ediciones Depalma. (1979).

Francisco Ramos Méndez. Derecho Procesal Civil. Librería Bosch Barcelona. (1986).

Hernando Devis Echandía. Compendio de Derecho Procesal. Pruebas judiciales. Editorial Diké. (1999).

Jairo Parra Quijano. Manual de Derecho Probatorio. Librería Ediciones del Profesional. (2004).

Jeremías Bentham. Tratado de las pruebas judiciales. Ediciones Nueva Jurídica. (2000).

Jorge Peyrano y Julio O. Chiappini. Lineamientos generales de las cargas probatorias “dinámicas”. Cargas probatorias dinámicas. Rubinzal-Culzoni Editores. (2004).

Julio Trujillo Cabrera. La carga de la prueba. Leyer Editorial. (2006)

Leo Rosemberg. La carga de la prueba. Editorial B de F. (2002).

Ley 1564 de 2012. Por medio de la cual se expide el Código General del Proceso y se dictan otras disposiciones. Julio 12 de 2012. do N.° 48489.

Luis Guillermo Acero Gallego. Modificación al régimen de la carga de la prueba en el Código General del Proceso. El proceso civil a partir del Código General del Proceso. Coord. Horacio Cruz Tejada. Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Derecho. (2014).

Luis Guillermo Serrano Escobar. El régimen probatorio en la responsabilidad médica. Ediciones Doctrina y Ley. (2012).

Michele Taruffo. La prueba. Marcial Pons. (2008).

Ricardo Luis Lorenzetti. Responsabilidad civil de los médicos. To m o ii. Rubinzal-Culzoni Editores. (1997).

Santos Ballesteros, I., Ortiz Arciniegas, E., & Ruiz Alarcón, R. (2016). Burdens of Proof in Medical Civil Liability Based on Doctrine and Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice. DIXI, 18(23). https://doi.org/10.16925/di.v18i23.1291

Download Citation

Every single author of the articles has to declare that is an original unpublished work exclusively created by them, that it has not been submitted for simultaneous evaluation by another publication and that there is no impediment of any kind for concession of the rights provided for in the contract.

In this sense, the authors committed to await the result of the evaluation by the journal DIXI before considering its submission to another medium; in case the response by that publication is positive, additionally, the authors committed to respond for any action involving claims, plagiarism or any other kind of claim that could be made by third parties.

At the same time, the authors have to declare that they are completely in agreement with the conditions presented in their work and that they cede all patrimonial rights. These rights involve reproduction, public communication, distribution, dissemination, transformation, making it available and all forms of exploitation of the work using any medium or procedure, during the term of the legal protection of the work and in every country in the world, to the Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia Press.

Issue

Vol. 18 No. 23 (2016)

Published

2016-04-01

Downloads

PDF (Spanish)

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

https://plu.mx/plum/a/?doi=10.16925/di.v18i23.1291