Проаналізовано творчий доробок професора та ректора Харківського університету
О. І. Палюмбецького стосовно деяких аспектів права Київської Русі. Основну увагу приділено його науковим поглядам щодо судових доказів у давньоруському законодавстві
порівняно з германським. Проаналізовано, як оцінювалися вченим такі докази, як власне зізнання, різного роду випробування, показання свідків.
The objective of the article is to highlight the scientific work of Professor O. I. Paliumbetskyi in
the field of the history of Old Russian law. This objective is specified in the following tasks: to
show how the witnesses testimonies were evaluated by scholars; what significance he gave to
probations in the system of court evidence of the time of Kievan Rus; where he saw
the peculiarities of the Russian legislation regarding court evidence in comparison with the
German one.
The scientific novelty of the article is the fact that it first reveals the essence of the scientific
contribution of O. I. Paliumbetskyi to the study of the judicial process of the Kievan Rus period.
The author has demonstrated what kind of court evidence of this time he considered the basic,
in particular, the author has revealed his understanding of the value of witness testimony (including
outcomes and obituaries), probations and oaths. The scholar has stressed that the development
of justice largely depended on the formation of statehood in Russia – there was the
evolution of the legal process with its genesis. O. I. Paliumbetskyi drew attention to the fact that
the distinctive feature of the most ancient laws of many peoples was the identity of private and
criminal law, according to which all decisions regarding private relations between individuals
were at the same time criminal law, and certain punishment was provided for their violation.
The researcher has shown that the testimony of witnesses in Old Russian law served as the basis
of the whole system, and all other evidence was related to it. Considering the significance of
the oath in legal proceedings of that period, O. I. Paliumbetskyi noted that the right to prove by
the oath in the old Russian laws equally belonged to both the indictor and the accused. The first
used it when he was not able to provide any evidence, even imperfect, and the latter used the
oath as a mean of purging from the evidence against him. The scholar pointed out that the fight
between the parties, according to the Russian law, was used in the absence of evidence of a
plaintiff and, moreover, served as evidence for a defendant, who could replace it with other
means of defense, except for the oath. O. I. Paliumbetskyi came to the conclusion that the influence
of German legislation on the Old Russian one in relation to the system of court evidence
was insignificant.
Проанализированы творческие наработки профессора и ректора Харьковского университета А. И. Палюмбецкого относительно некоторых аспектов права Киевской Руси. Основное внимание уделено его научным взглядам касательно судебных доказательств в
древнерусском законодательстве по сравнению с германским. Проанализировано, как
оценивались учёным такие доказательства, как собственное признание, разного рода
испытания, показания свидетелей.
