2026-04-22T21:09:59Zhttps://uvadoc.uva.es/oai/request

oai:uvadoc.uva.es:10324/733942025-03-26T19:45:19Zcom_10324_5262com_10324_5186com_10324_29291col_10324_73387

Bianchi, Riccardo 2025-01-09T15:10:15Z 2025-01-09T15:10:15Z 2025 Revista de Estudios Europeos; Núm. 85 (2025) pags. 430-463 2530-9854 https://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/73394 10.24197/ree.85.2025.430-463 430 85 463 Analysis, comparison, and critique are the actions that constitute comparative studies. This work, which focuses on exclusionary rules of evidence, employs legal comparison between the Italian and Spanish systems for three purposes: (a) to understand the rationale behind the exclusion of evidence from proceedings; (b) to apply the conclusions drawn to European law, to determine whether the latter (b.1) requires the exclusion of certain evidence or (b.2) conversely, obliges the national judge to disregard the rule; (c) finally, to use the results of the comparison to assess whether judicial balancing is an appropriate solution, even within the European context. eng info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International La prueba ilícita: la razón de ser y el derecho de la Unión Europea info:eu-repo/semantics/article