Jurisprudential review of oath rules in the judiciary

This study undertakes a jurisprudential examination of oaths pertinent to judicial proceedings. Presenting evidence to the court to substantiate or defend a claim carries profound implications, emphasizing the imperative of comprehending and acknowledging these ramifications to effectively deploy "evidence" and succeed in the litigation process. Among the evidence types, the oath of denial of knowledge warrants deeper investigation and scrutiny due to the legislative silence and divergent juristic opinions surrounding it. The oath of denial of knowledge, constituting a distinct category of oath, can exert unique influences on the dispute, encompassing the dispute concerning knowledge and the primary lawsuit. Refusal to undertake such an oath may precipitate significant consequences, including the claimant's rejection or unsuccessful validation of the oath. Moreover, while acknowledging specific analogous effects between the oath of denial of knowledge and other oath types, exemptions from undertaking a specific oath and the incapacity to substantiate the principal claim solely through the oath represent particular impacts of the oath of denial of knowledge.