There are questions of fact as well as civil and criminal proceedings. Questions of fact are represented by findings of fact, each of which is tested: is the assertion true or false? [4] EDITION, pleading. A point of contention is defined in procedural documents as a single, certain and essential point arising from the parties` allegations and generally consisting of a positive and a negative point. In everyday language, question also means the registration of pleadings. 1 puppy. Pl. 630. 2. Questions are essential if they are correctly formulated on a substantive point which resolves the disputed issue between the parties; and irrelevant if it is based on an intangible fact which, although established by the judgment, will not determine the merits of the case and would leave the court perplexed as to how it should decide. 2 Saund. 319, No.
6. 3. The questions are also divided into legal and factual issues. 1. A point of law admits all the facts and is simply based on a point of law. It is said to consist of a single point, but it must be understood that such a question necessarily concerns only one rule or one principle of law, or that it calls into question only the legal sufficiency of a single fact. It is understood that such a question reduces the whole controversy to the question of whether the facts admitted by the question are legally sufficient to maintain the action or defence of the party who invoked it. 2. A question is indeed a question on which the parties disagree on its existence, one asserts its existence and the other denies it.
At common law, any fact, with a few exceptions mentioned below, must consist of a direct positive statement on the one hand and a direct negation on the other. Co. Litt. 126, a; Ferry. From. Pleas in law, &c. G 1; 5 Peter 149; 2 Black. R. 1312; 8 R. T.
278. However, it held that if the respondent claimed that he was born in France and the plaintiff replied that he was born in England, that was sufficient to formulate a good question. 1 Wils. 6; 2, rue 1177. In this case, there were two affirmatives, and the reason why the question was declared good is that the second affirmative is so opposed to the first that the first can in no way be true. The above exceptions to the rule that a direct affirmative and a direct negative are required are as follows: 1. The general question of a court decision is formed by two affirmatives: on the one hand, the plaintiff claims that he has a higher right than that of the tenant; and on the other hand, that the tenant has a higher right than the plaintiff. This problem is called Mise. (S. A.) Lawes, pl.
232; 3 puppy. Pl. 652: 3 Bl. Com. 195, 305. 2d. In an action for dowry, the court requires only the third part of the acre of land, &c., as the dowry of the plaintiff of the foundation of A B, formerly the husband, &c., and the general issue is that A B was not seized of such an estate, &c., and that he could not bury the applicant, &c. 2 Saund. 329, 330. This kind of negation, rather than being direct, is merely argumentative, and argumentative is generally not allowed in pleading. 4.
The problems are indeed divided into general problems, special problems and general problems. 5. The general question directly denies the explanation as a whole; as in personal actions in which the defendant pleads zero debit that he owes nothing to the plaintiff; or guilty of not being guilty of the facts alleged in the statement; or in real acts in which the defendant invokes a misdemeanour, a misdemeanour, a misdemeanour. These and other similar means are called general questions because, by introducing an absolute and general denial of all the points alleged in the statement, they immediately call them all into question. 6. In the past, the general question was rarely raised, unless the defendant wished to dismiss the charge in its entirety, for if he wished to avoid and justify the accusation, it was customary for him to present the particular ground of his defence as a specific objection which seems necessary to convince the court and the plaintiff of the particular nature and circumstances of the defendant`s case. and was originally intended to separate law and fact. And even now, it is an immutable rule that any defence that cannot be particularly advanced can be presented as evidence at trial on the general issue, so that in many cases the accused is obliged to present the particular circumstances of his particular defence, and cannot present them as evidence of this general objection. However, because the science of special advocacy has often been perverted for harassment and delay, the courts in some cases and the legislature in other cases have allowed the general issue to be raised and a particular issue to be presented at trial, which at the same time covers the facts, justice and law of the case. 3 Bl. Com. 305, 6; 3 Green.
Ev. Section 9. 7. The specific question is whether the defendant challenges only a substantial part of the statement and bases the weight of its arguments on it; It is then said that, unlike the general question, it repeats a special question that denies and questions the whole explanation. Com. Dig. Oral argument, R 1, 2. 8. The common problem is the designation of what is formed on the sole exception of non est factum when it is based on a breach. This is called so because there can be no general question for a broken federal law, since the plea non est fadum, which denies only the act and not the rupture, does not call into question the whole explanation. 1 puppy. Pl.
482; Lawes on pl. 113; Gould, Pl. v. 6, Part 1, § 7 and § 10, 2. 9. The questions are formal and informal. 10. A formal question is one which is formed appropriately and artificially in accordance with the rules laid down by law.
11. An informal question is a question that arises when a significant claim is presented inappropriately or artificially. From. Memoirs, &c., G 2, N 5; 2 Saund. 319, A, No. 6. The deficiency is corrected by judgment, by the law of 32 H. VIII. to 30.12. The problems are also divided into real and false problems.