Land Expert Evidence Problem Review in Russia

Karpik, Alexander P.; Parkhomenko, D. V.

doi:10.33764/2411-1759-2019-24-1-192-203

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Каждый из этих видов может дать методическую основу экспертному исследованию в области наук о Земле. Однако в настоящее время не утверждены методы, которые были признаны научным сообществом для геодезической экспертизы или для отдельных ее видов, то же самое наблюдается в отношении технологий, которые должен использовать эксперт, и оборудования [9].…”

Section: таблица 2 примеры возможных несоответствий научных тенденций и требований законодательстваunclassified

Use of Modern Achievements of Science and Technology by Judicial Expert in the Manufacturing of Geodetic Expert Evidence

Parkhomenko¹,

Fedorenko²,

Parkhomenko³

2019

Vestnik SSUGT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article highlights the problems of using modern technologies in the judicial land expert evidence, including in terms of the incompatibility of scientific achievements with the requirements of the legislation. The aim of the study is to identify the features of the use of special measurement methods in the judicial geodetic examination, and the task is to characterize the changing trends of measurement methods and technologies. The research method consists in the analysis and synthesis of the existing practice of the production of forensic geodetic examination. The results of the study are that the expert's conclusion is to indicate all the methods used by the expert. It was concluded that for measuring and analyzing large spatial arrays, methods of cartography, photogrammetry, and laser scanning can be used as an essential sub-institution of photogrammetry. Taking into account the quality of measurements that has stepped forward, experts should use them. The authors conclude that if there is a discrepancy between the requirements of the law and the achievements of science, the expert should indicate in the expert opinion such discrepancies. The conclusions of the expert opinion should follow scientific results and trends.

show abstract

Section: таблица 2 примеры возможных несоответствий научных тенденций и требований законодательстваunclassified

Use of Modern Achievements of Science and Technology by Judicial Expert in the Manufacturing of Geodetic Expert Evidence

Parkhomenko¹,

Fedorenko²,

Parkhomenko³

2019

Vestnik SSUGT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The problem of conceptual apparatus of land surveying expertise

Анатольевна¹,

Александровна²,

Алефтинович³

et al. 2020

Финансы И Управление

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The object of this research is the normative legal documents that regulate the process of conducting various types of land surveying expertise. The subject of this research is the conceptual apparatus of land surveying expertise, formed by the indicated documentation. In the course of this study, the authors examined the organizational and legal framework of forensic land surveying expertise and state expertise of land surveying documentation; procedural experience in conducting these types of land surveying expertise; case law on resolution of land and property disputes; works of national and foreign scholars on the matter. The authors attempted to formulate recommendation on the arrangement of conceptual apparatus of land surveying expertise. The relevance of this research is substantiated by insufficient scientific-methodological basis and conceptual apparatus of forensic land surveying expertise. The scientific novelty lies in juxtaposition of the practice, conceptual apparatus, legal, and scientific-methodological framework of forensic land surveying expertise and state expertise of land surveying documentation. The conclusion is made that on partial nonconformity of the concept of forensic land surveying expertise to the type of works conducted thereof. It is proposed to amend judicial legislation with regards to allocation of the new type of forensic expertise, as well as cadastral legislation with regards to broadening the types of cadastral activity.

show abstract

Limits of Fact-Finding in the Notary Actions vs Questions for Experts

Karpusheva¹

2021

Interexpo GEO-Siberia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article considers notary as a subject appointment of examination and sending documents for examination. The gaps in legislation regulating this issue are analyzed. The purpose of the study is to draw attention to expanding the possibility of using the institution of notaries reduce the backlog of cases in courts. Comparative and logical research methods are used. As a result of the research, the author came to the conclusion that it is necessary to improve the current legislation. The chosen topic has not previously been the subject of research.

show abstract

Land Expert Evidence Problem Review in Russia

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Use of Modern Achievements of Science and Technology by Judicial Expert in the Manufacturing of Geodetic Expert Evidence

Use of Modern Achievements of Science and Technology by Judicial Expert in the Manufacturing of Geodetic Expert Evidence

The problem of conceptual apparatus of land surveying expertise

Limits of Fact-Finding in the Notary Actions vs Questions for Experts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About