Literature review


How to cite: Freire JJB, Dantas RAA, Dantas E. The simplified technical proof from the perspective of legal medicine and medical expertise. Persp Med Legal Perícia Med. 2020; 5(3).

submitted Sept. 15th 2020, accepted Oct. 3rd 2020



José Jozefran Berto Freire (1)

                                                                  Currículo Lattes: – ID ORCID: 0000-0003-1817-9427

Rosa Amélia Andrade Dantas (2)

  Currículo Lattes: – ID ORCID: 0000-0003-1675-7158

Eduardo Dantas (3)

  Currículo Lattes: – ID ORCID: 0000-0002-8573-995X

(1) Universidade Estadual de Pernambuco, Recife-PE, Brasil.

(2) Universidade Federal do Sergipe, Aracaju-SE, Brasil.

(3) Lawyer specialized in Medical Law, Recife-PE, Brasil.










The answers in medical expertise depend on a technical and objective analysis, and generates the need to build proof of scientific, objective, clear, distinct and demonstrable character. This article aims to analyze article 464 of the Code of Civil Procedure-CPC/2015 on the Simplified Technical Proof from the perspective of expert medical activity. A literature review was carried out using the Keywords “expert evidence”; “simplified technical proof”; “medical expertise”; “expertise in legal medicine” and “medical expertise”, in Google Scholar and Capes Journals databases, and following the analysis of Article 464 of the CPC. The bibliographic research carried out on the subject did not show scientific papers published in the area of medicine in general or in the specialty of legal medicine and medical expertise, which addressed the changes that occurred in CPC/2015. The expert evidence from the perspective of legal medicine and medical expertise is concrete, but it is inserted in a context of large amplitude. That context necessarily has grounds, as technically, of traces and indications. It is understood here as necessary: what it cannot fail to be (15). On the simplified technical proof, a problem that presents itself is the proper definiton of what “less complexity” means. In the analyzed studies we did not find reference to the general or specific scientific methodology, which supports the performance of the simplified technical proof, nor its technical or scientific definitions. In the conclusion, we present warnings for expert physician practices considering arguments that are listed in article 464 of the CPC.

Keywords: Simplified Technical Proof, Legal Medicine, Code of Civil Procedure-CPC/2015, legal proof.