The dynamic burden of proof and the use of equity by colombian jurisprudence, to consider the damage caused by loss of opportunity

Abstract

In civil and State liability processes where the existence of a loss of opportunity is discussed, it is common for judges to resort to the dynamic burden of proof or equity to have it proven. This work aims to support the inappropriateness of this practice. For this, the methodology of analysis and critical dogmatic study of the legal discourses of the rulings of the Supreme Court of Justice in its civil chamber and of the Council of State in its third section, of national and foreign doctrine, and legislation will be followed on the burden of proof, in order to argue against the possibility of the judge to make an ad-hoc distribution of the evidence of damage. Likewise, it is intended to demonstrate that despite the existence of regulations on the possibility of assessing the amount of the damage based on equity, this does not justify the jurisprudential practice of assigning in the judgment a value of 50 % to the lost probability; these decisions may constitute a misuse of equity in its integrative modality -praeter legem-, if the nature of the loss of the opportunity is recognized as damage and not as damage.