Valerio Tavormina

The decision on the merits in proceedings concerning the annulment of acts consists also in the assessment and possibly in the creation of the relevance/effectiveness of the facts that are allegedly invalidating and of the contested act itself with regard to the underlying subjective situation, which is therefore also (at least partially) subject of the judgment (and of the res judicata)...

ABSTRACT A framework of substantive law is drawn and the enforcement of individual entitlements (rights etc.) and public powers emerges as the sole excluded matter. So procedural law has to coincide with the regulation of proceedings aimed at said enforcement subject to, or under reserve of, an impartial checking of the contended rights and powers. Since it is forbidden to modify everybody’s state of affairs without a due process of law, everybody has a (substantive) right thereupon, mutually exclusive with the opposite contended right and both rights are part of the subject matter of every enforcement proceedings. All the rules governing the assessment of an enforcement proceeding’s substantive lawfulness are part of substantive (not procedural) law. KEY WORDS: rules, provisions, seminal and derivative rules, duties and entitlements, rights and powers, substantive law, procedural law, enforcement proceedings.

ABSTRACT: Rules on admissibility of evidence of facts pertaining to substantive law belong to the same field (substantive law). Restrictions in this subject are therefore as many restrictions of individual rights. It follows that the constitutionality of said restrictions depends on the wideness of the constitutional protection of same rights and not on the power (warranted it too by the Constitution) to enforce them through judicial proceedings. KEY WORDS: evidence of facts, restrictions, substantive law, constitutional rights.