Question of Fact and Legal Issue

Distinguishing between FACTUAL AND LEGAL ISSUES is fundamentally important and difficult. For example, whether CAUSAL ITY is A MATTER OF FACT OR LAW. The Supreme Court has for some time considered: CAUSATION is a MATTER OF FACT and therefore an appeal on cassation cannot be based on it. After a while, he changed his mind: CAUSATION is a LEGAL ISSUE and therefore an appeal on cassation can be based on it.

In law science – as in all science – the most difficulties raise questions about the most fundamental issues. As you know, Mr Russel discovered the famous paradox of the question: whether or not a collection of all collections is its own element. Every answer leads to contradictions. B. Russel wrote a letter to the eminent Italian mathematician Peano, who replied to Russel, “mathematics woes in the basics.” Goedl’s theorem goes even further, which says that any mathematical theory containing a minimum amount of arithmetic cannot be proved by its own assertions. The difference is this: the lack of clarity on fundamental issues:
(a) in mathematics – does not affect the outcome of specific equations
(b) in law – affects the rights of a particular person. In my humble opinion, CAUSAL ITY has both a legal and factual aspect.