Discours judiciaire sur la transparence des utilisateur·rice·s des réseaux sociaux

The law is grasping the legal consequences of daily and voluntary manifestations of transparency, especially that of users of social networks who reveal all or almost all of their lives. The purpose of this article is to analyze, based on the study of case law on the admissibility of evidence from social networks in a civil trial, the judicial discourse on this transparency. On the merits, this study will make it possible to establish links between this transparency and the quest for judicial truth, this means of proof being admissible, but only within certain limits. This is the meaning of judicial discourse. In terms of form, this discourse appears opaque both because of other legal or non-legal discourses and because of the medium that carries it. This is the problem of the dissemination of judicial discourse.