|
The rule is that when the evidence is illegally obtained, in violation of human rights, it is automatically excluded, without any room for judicial discretion (except if any exception is explicitly provided by the law for the purposes set by the Constitution). That evidence is not automatically excluded when it only violates statutory provisions, where there is a room for judicial discretion.
Videotaping people without any previous warning that a camera is placed and without their permission seems to violate their right to privacy, which is well protected as a human right.
Even for the cameras placed in public places or outside private properties, we have to use signs telling people that here there is a camera, and this warning seems to be enough for giving other people the opportunity to decide whether they would like to be there and get videotaped.
Your own behavior, as behavior, is not illegal itself (when you keep this material for yourself and not published), even though you cannot use your video in a Court of justice in order to prove the crime of that seller or as evidence of fact that you had paid the purchase price. The exclusion of evidence is a work for the Court, in the course of a trial, and not for anyone.
In order for the seller to claim such purchase price, he will need to issue an invoice (and pay the VAT), and generally his own evidence, since the burden of proof is initially on him. Hence, it is not the time to look for evidence of payment without having an invoice to set in doubt; just do not pay because someone calls you on the phone and he asks for money…
As avoiding paying VAT is illegal, same as not giving receipt of payment to consumers, you have some extra tools (i.e. claim to the police, claim to consumers’ association, etc).
_________________
Lucem Sequamur
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
