The Court of First Place shall set out the question

Asking questions in the economic process is particularly difficult, because only facts are to be the subject of testimony, and the dispute concerns the EFFECTS OF LEGAL ACTS. The difficulty is how to ask questions about how different activities are linked. If a party to withdraw from a contract has indicated a specific contractual clause, that does not mean that there were indeed FACTS that fell under that clause.

The party withdrawing from the contract did not describe the FACTS which it had in mind in referring to the clause in question. In such a situation, the agent asked the witness: ‘Was the defendant’s withdrawal from the contract a consequence of the failure to provide a bank guarantee’. The court set aside the question as suggestive. Secondly, the wording contained in the wording of the question ‘ was a consequence’ is a question about the APPLICATION, which, according to the WITNESS, is based on facts which the witness may have known but did not testify about.

The questions should concern: HOW HAS THE DECLARATION OF WITHDRAWAL MATERIALIZED – who, when, where, under what circumstances and with whose participation, after consulting someone, on the basis of what information and by whom provided, etc. decided to make the disputed statement. It is only by knowing all these facts that the COURT CAN CONCLUDE WHAT WAS THE CONSISTENCY OF WHAT.