Literature by the same author
plus at Google Scholar

Bibliografische Daten exportieren
 

Procedural versus Substantive Approaches to Scientific Evidence in the Opinions of Advocates-General

Title data

Molitorisová, Alexandra ; Burke, Ciarán:
Procedural versus Substantive Approaches to Scientific Evidence in the Opinions of Advocates-General.
In: Varela, Justo Corti ; Farah, Paolo Davide (ed.): Science, Technology, Policy and International Law. - London : Routledge , 2024
ISBN 9781003472421

Official URL: Volltext

Abstract in another language

This chapter examines the assistance offered by advocates general (AGs) to the European Court of Justice in the context of assessments of scientific evidence. The chapter analyzes two approaches to examining scientific evidence adopted by AGs, namely, substantive and procedural. The substantive approach involves scrutinizing scientific evidence, with an AG drawing inferences, for example, by interpreting the scientific evidence available. The procedural approach entails assessing the quality of production of scientific evidence, that is, whether the mechanisms employed in the scientific evidence production lead to sound scientific evidence. The chapter first inquires in which contexts the two approaches are used. The chapter then aims to understand the impact of AGs’ work with evidence on the Court’s output. It asks whether substantive or procedural approaches may facilitate the Court’s own assessment of scientific evidence. It observes that substantial engagement with evidence may be accompanied by epistemic concerns. The opinions of AGs may demonstrate to the Court where such problems exist. On the other hand, procedural engagement with evidence may lead to overreliance upon the evidence adduced by parties to cases. The AGs and the Court may enhance each other’s understanding of factors behind evaluations of scientific evidence and share a gate-keeping role as regards its admissibility and assessment.

Further data

Item Type: Article in a book
Refereed: Yes
Keywords: evidence; admissibility; European Court of Justice; advocate general; questions of fact; questions of law
Institutions of the University: Faculties
Faculties > Faculty of Life Sciences: Food, Nutrition and Health > Chair Food Law > Chair Food Law - Univ.-Prof. Dr. Kai Purnhagen
Result of work at the UBT: Yes
DDC Subjects: 300 Social sciences > 340 Law
Date Deposited: 03 Jun 2024 08:44
Last Modified: 03 Jun 2024 08:44
URI: https://eref.uni-bayreuth.de/id/eprint/89646