The author explores the evidence issues through the prism of conciliation procedures.
For the purposes of the article the pretrial dispute resolution procedure, negotiations and
mediation are considered as conciliation procedures. Attention is drawn to the fact that
the impact of conciliation procedures on evidentiary activities may be different depending
on whether they are used before going to court or during court proceedings. In relation to
the mandatory pretrial dispute resolution procedure, the problem of proving its compliance
is analyzed. The evidentiary value of the negotiation clause is revealed. Depending on its
content, the independence of the negotiation as an obligatory pretrial procedure is justified.
When applying the mediation procedure, the main issue concerns the need to respect the
principle of confidentiality. Attention is drawn to the shortcomings of the legal regulation
of the issues of admissibility of evidence and mediator’s evidence of immunity. One of the
results of conciliation procedures is a settlement agreement. On the example of judicial
practice, the problem of proving the good faith of the parties in concluding a settlement
agreement is revealed and the existence of the presumption of good faith of the parties in
the court process is substantiated. However, the presumption of good faith of the parties in
concluding a settlement agreement is not intended to redistribute evidentiary obligations
but entails for the parties if the court establishes unfair conduct adverse consequences in
the form of the continuation of the hearing and the adoption of a judicial act. The questions
discussed lead to the conclusion that it is necessary to fully develop the specifics of judicial
evidence when using conciliation procedures.
Keywords: civil procedure; conciliation procedures; pretrial dispute resolution procedure;
negotiation; mediation; proving; admissibility of evidence; witness immunity; confidentiality
principle; presumption of good faith; settlement agreement.