The Position of Decisive Oath in Proof of Causation in The Alternative Cause

One of the indisputable principles of jurisprudence and law is the need to compensate the damages caused to others. If the damage is caused by nonperformance of contractual obligations, the basis of the lawsuit are the rules of contractual liability and if there is no agreement between the parties, the rules of tort will prevail over the relations between the parties. According to the general rules, proving the elements of tort is necessary and incumbent on the injured party. One of the evidences for proving a claim is an oath, and one of the types of oath is a decisive oath, which, if the conditions are met and the relevant rules are observed, can be invoked in a civil liability lawsuit to prove the elements of the claim. In cases where the infliction of bodily or financial damage is caused by alternative causes, sometimes the injured party does not have the ability and requirement evidences to prove the causation and the probability of taking an oath and playing a role is much higher than other cases. The method of this research is descriptive-analytical. Regarding the role of decisive oath in proof of causation, there are many different opinions that it seems appropriate that taking an oath by the defendant or the accused as the cause of the termination of the causation and his innocence and, in the end, if a person cannot be held liable for damages, it must be ordered to pay damages from the public budget.