The article explores the features of the fundamental principles of legal argumentation that affect their application and interpretation. Separate emphasis is placed on the origin of various principles. The basic principles of legal argumentation are similar to general scientific ones, but modified to meet the needs of legal argumentation. These principles have a moral and ethical basis, which entails a certain freedom of interpretation and application, but at the same time there are criteria that determine the degree of implementation of these principles in each individual case. Highly specialized principles were formed together with the types of trial processes in which they are applied and, accordingly, adopted their specifics. These principles are applied in the vast majority of trials, but to varying degrees, due to the peculiarities of modern legal proceedings. The principle of freedom of evaluation of evidence is highlighted as it applies regardless of the type of trial and has a complex regulatory structure. This structure has two main components – legislative and moral recognized by law. The interaction of principles and their interdependence is described. The features of their application and possible interpretations are indicated.
1. Vasyliev S. (2017) Formuvannia suchasnykh vydiv tsyvilnoho sudochynstva. [Formation of modern types of civil proceedings]. Porivnialno-analitychne pravo. Uzhhorod. : «DVNZ Uzhhorodskyi natsionalnyi universytet». № 2. S. 56-59. URL: http://www.pap.in.ua/2_2017/15.pdf 2. Kistianyk V. Osoblyvosti arhumentatsii v sudakh zahalnoi yurysdyktsii. [Features of argumentation in courts of General jurisdiction]. Naukovi zapysky. Tom 168. 3. Koziubra M. I. (2013) Modeli (typy) yurydychnoi arhumentatsii. [Models (types) of legal argumentation].Naukovi zapysky NaUKMA. T. P 144–145. 4. (2020) Kryminalnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy. [Criminal procedural code of Ukraine]. Red. 11.06. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/4651-17 5. Kuchuk A. (2016) Pryntsypy piznannia pravovykh yavyshch yak element metodolohii. [Principles of knowledge of legal phenomena as an element of methodolog]. Aktualni problemy vitchyznianoi yurysprudentsii. № 4. URL: http://apnl.dnu.in.ua/4_2016/4.pdf 6. Mamnytskyi V. (2014) Poniattia ta zmist pryntsypu zmahalnosti u tsyvilnomu sudochynstvi. [Concept and content of the adversarial principle in civil proceedings]. Forum prava. № 3. P. 201-206. URL: http://surl.li/disb 7. Markush M. (2007) Pryntsyp zmahalnosti v kryminalnomu protsesi Ukrainy. [The principle of competition in the criminal process of Ukraine. Kharkov]. Kharkiv. Vydavets SPD FO Vapniarchuk N.M. 208 p. URL: http://library.nlu.edu.ua/POLN_TEXT/UP/MARKUSH_2007.pdf 8. Myroshnychenko Yu. (2016) Pryntsyp vilnoi otsinky dokaziv v aspekti nezalezhnosti sudu ta samostiinosti suddi u vyrishenni kryminalnykh sprav. [The principle of free evaluation of evidence in terms of court independence and autonomy of judges in criminal matters]. Mariupol. № 5. URL: http://lsej.org.ua/5_2016/42.pdf 9. Rohalska V. (2012) Zmahalnist u doudovomu provadzhenni. [Adversarial proceedings in pre-trial proceedings]. Dnipropetrovsk. Dniprop. derzh. un-t vnutr. sprav. 172 p. URL: https://dduvs.in.ua/wp-content/uploads/files/Structure/library/student/m... 10. Yurkevych M. (2012) Yurydychna arhumentatsiia. [Legal reasoning]. O. M. Yurkevych, V. D. Tytov, S. V. Kutsepal ta in. Kh. URL: http://dspace.nlu.edu.ua/bitstream/123456789/1493/1/Jr_Argum_2012.pdf 11. Savenko M. Yurydychna arhumentatsiia v konstytutsiinomu sudovomu protsesi: metodolohichnyi aspekt. [Legal argumentation in the constitutional court process: methodological aspect]. K. NaUKMA. URL: http://ekmair.ukma.edu.ua/bitstream/handle/123456789/2210/Savenko_Yurydy... 12. Yanovska O. Dialektyka rozvytku zmahalnoho kryminalnoho sudochynstva: istoriia ta suchasnist. [Dialectics of the development of adversarial criminal proceedings: history and modernity]. Yurydychna Ukraina. URL: http://www.pravnuk.info/urukrain/1219-dialektika-rozvitku-zmagalnogo-kri...