Download Free Civil Justice Between Efficiency And Quality Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Civil Justice Between Efficiency And Quality and write the review.

For a long time, civil justice was considered to be a purely national, conservative, and slow-changing topic. The texts collected in this book supply proof that this is no longer the case. These papers discuss civil justice from a European angle, concentrating on the age-old dichotomy between quality and efficiency. One of the developments that has triggered civil justice to become an international discipline is the establishment of the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice - better known by the acronym of its French name, the CEPEJ - on September 18, 2002 by the Council of Europe. The mandate of the CEPEJ is to analyze the results of the various judicial systems of the Member States of the Council of Europe, to identify the difficulties these systems encounter, to develop concrete ways to improve them, and to evaluate the functioning of these systems. Various papers in this volume address the CEPEJ and its work, as well as other issues of civil procedure in Europe, such as legal aid, alternative dispute resolution, and the influence of European developments on the reform of national civil justice systems. Consequently, the book provides an overview of the most recent ideas and developments in the field of civil justice. These ideas and developments show that although the values of the old tradition of European ius commune are still alive, they have been modified and expanded to such an extent that the organization of efficient civil justice systems has become a feasible option for national legislatures.
A recent study in the field of comparative economics (or, more precisely, numerical comparative law) constructed an index of procedural formalism of dispute resolution for more than 100 countries and analyzed the relationship between procedural formalism and certain aspects of quality of the judicial systems. The study's results suggest a strong relationship between legal origins, formalism, and the quality of dispute resolution. Not surprisingly, the study closes with a recommendation for reform. What makes this study so important is not only its findings, backed by an amount of data which seems to be a guarantee for the study's universal validity, but also the financial support of the World Bank - an indicator of the Bank's interest in these questions. Similar studies in the area of banking, securities, and corporate law have received much attention from the legal community. However, for the recent study on civil procedure, this is not the case. Christoph Kern provides a first critical approach to the study from the perspective of a legal scholar. He does not suggest a mere re-coding, but focuses on the methodology and the underlying legal questions. After an extensive discussion of the input to the study, the author turns to the way the study combines the data and, in particular, how it interprets the results. He concludes that the study leaves a mixed impression and that, therefore, doubts remain as to its results and interpretation.
The book focuses on legal instruments that promote simplification of the process and timely completion of the lawsuit in the first instance civil procedure. It observes the changes of traditional principles in the pursuit of efficient and high quality court procedures. Results of a research conducted from 2007 to 2010 are presented. Civil procedures of multiple jurisdictions are covered, including the most "influencing" English, French and German procedures and specific procedural regulations in Austria, the Netherlands and Hungary - the latter used as a basis of reflection, as the "native" procedure of the author. Small claims procedures are interpreted as one significant way of providing access to justice by keeping judicial resources and procedural costs moderate while providing a well-established judgment with all its effects and enforceability. A balance of parties' rights and managing powers of the judge together with the principle of cooperation guaranteed by explicit procedural liabilities in the law may lead to an effective and just system of civil litigation. The book should help gain insight into efficiency issues in civil justice for lawyers or anyone interested.
This volume addresses the role of the judge and the parties in civil litigation in mainland China, Hong Kong and various European jurisdictions. It provides an overview and an analysis of how these respective roles have been changed in order to cope with growing caseloads and quality demands. It also shows the different approaches chosen in the jurisdictions covered. Mainland China is introducing far-reaching reforms in its system of civil litigation. From an inquisitorial procedure, in which the parties play a relatively minor role, the country is changing to a more adversarial system with increased powers for the parties. At the same time, case management and the role of the judge as it is understood in mainland China remains different from case management and the role of the judge in Western countries, mainly as regards the limited powers of individual Chinese judges in this respect. Changes in China are justified by the ever-increasing case load of the Chinese courts and the consequent inability to deal with cases in an adequate manner, even though generally speaking Chinese courts still adjudicate civil cases within a relatively short time frame (this may, however, be problematic when viewed from the perspective of the quality of adjudication). Growing caseloads and quality concerns may also be observed in various European states and Hong Kong. In these jurisdictions the civil procedural systems have a relatively adversarial character and it is some of the adversarial features of the existing systems of procedure which are felt to be problematic. Therefore, the lawmakers have opted for increasing the powers of the judge, often making the judge and the parties mutually responsible for the proper conduct of civil cases. Starting from opposite directions, mainland China and the various European states and Hong Kong could meet half way in their reform attempts. This is, however, only possible if a proper understanding is fostered of the developments in these different parts of the World. Even though in both China and Europe the academic community and lawmakers are showing a keen interest in the relevant developments abroad, a study addressing the role of the judge and the parties in civil litigation in both China and Europe is still missing. This book aims to fill this gap in the existing literature.
Recent efforts to assess whether or not the trial is vanishing from the civil justice system, have thus far not drawn distinctions between cases in which the market efficiency function of the legal system is in play and those in which democratic and political functions are in play. As Marc Galanter famously set out thirty years ago in his seminal work on why the haves come out ahead and as current studies of the legal profession confirm, however, we should expect that there are significant differences in how corporations, organizations, governments and private individuals fare in our legal system: these different entities bring different resources to bear and they face different repeat versus one-shot incentives. Normatively, the issues at stake in our understanding of what is happening to civil cases and the efforts to craft alternatives to traditional civil litigation require that we differentiate between litigants, between legal functions, and between the different goals of our legal system. It may be that the disappearance of public civil trials to resolve commercial contract disputes is of no consequence; indeed it may be an efficient response to the increasing cost of the public system. The same cannot be said of the disappearance - if it is a real phenomenon - of public adjudication of civil rights or the claims of individuals about the misconduct of public or corporate actors. Private and confidential dispute resolution may be perfectly appropriate and something to be promoted in the resolution of family disputes, whereas it may be inappropriate in the resolution of patent disputes in which two corporations may bargain over the division of monopoly rents or in the resolution of disputes between the state and citizens about how electoral districts are determined. If judicial resources are strained by caseloads, which litigants are flooding in - corporate or individual? And if rationing is required, if an attempt to reduce the number of cases to which judges and courts devote their efforts is required, which cases should be diverted into private dispute resolution and which should be retained for public adjudication? In this paper I present preliminary data on the differences between individual and organizational litigants in the disposition of federal civil cases. This paper follows on an earlier paper in which I developed a methodology for increasing the value of the database created by the Administrative Office of the US Courts. Here I endeavor to show the differences between individual and organizational litigants in the rate at which cases are abandoned, defaulted, adjudicated without a trial, adjudicated with a trial, or settled. The results show substantial differences in cases based, primarily, on plaintiff rather than defendant type. I find individual plaintiff cases are substantially more likely to be determined by an adjudication - especially a non-trial adjudication - than are organizational plaintiff cases. I also find evidence that organizational plaintiffs - against either individual or organizational defendants - are substantially more likely to settle their cases rather than to have them decided either by trial or non-trial adjudication.
This book explores the regulations, goals and functioning of preparatory proceedings in four Nordic countries and eight former communist countries. The contributions discuss whether, and how the regulation and practice of preparatory proceedings enhance swift civil justice that is both inexpensive and has quality outcomes. A central question is whether the main hearing model of civil justice, in which preclusion of new evidence and claims occur at the end of the preparatory stage, results in greater efficiency, or whether the functioning of civil proceedings largely depends on other factors. It also examines regulation and use of court-connected mediation and judicial settlement efforts. This book offers comparative insights into the functioning of the preparatory civil proceedings in the countries covered. Preparatory proceedings are considered a key tool for achieving efficient civil proceedings. The claims and factual background of the case are clarified at an early stage, and the main hearing is focused. Judicial settlement efforts and court-connected mediation contribute to early resolution of cases, and are important elements of Nordic civil procedure The Nordic countries have used the main hearing model of civil proceedings for some decades, and recent reforms have further enhanced the role of the preparatory stage. Former communist countries are reforming their earlier piecemeal- format civil proceedings by introducing and strengthening written and oral preparation, as well as court-connected mediation.
National civil justice systems are deeply rooted in national legal cultures and traditions. However, in the past few decades they have been increasingly influenced by integration processes at the regional, supra-national and international level. As a by-product of the emergence of economic and political unions and globalisation processes there is pressure to harmonise or even unify the way in which national civil justice systems operate. In an attempt to create a ‘genuine area of justice’, new unified procedures are being developed, which operate in parallel with national civil procedures, and sometimes even strive to replace them. As a reaction to the forces that endeavour to harmonise and unify procedural laws and practices, an opposing trend is gaining momentum: one that insists on diversity and pluralism of national civil procedures. This book focuses on the evolution of procedural reforms in various jurisdictions and the ongoing transformation of national civil justice systems.
"Quality, independence and efficiency are the key components of effective justice systems, a crucial condition to ensure the proper functioning of important drivers of growth in the EU. This paper focuses on judicial efficiency and investigates the impact of certain structural reforms affecting the civil justice system on selected economic outcomes, such as business dynamics and foreign direct investments (FDI). In doing so, the role of efficiency of justice systems (measured by disposition time and the ratio of pending cases to population, both referred to litigious civil and commercial disputes) is highlighted as a transmission channel linking judicial reforms to economic variables. The work draws upon a dataset based on the reports by the Council of Europe's European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). The results support the growth potential of judicial reforms rationalising the organisation of courts, fostering investment in in-court ICT and introducing incentives to reduce excessive litigation rates (for instance by enhancing the use of alternative disputes resolution methods), which are all found to positively affect the efficiency of civil justice. By increasing the efficiency of the justice system, these reforms can enhance entrepreneurial activity (as measured by firms' entry rates) and FDI."--Document home page.
This book is a collection of papers that address a fundamental question: What is the role of civil justice and civil procedure in the various national traditions in the contemporary world? The book presents striking differences among a range of countries and legal traditions, but also points to common trends and open issues. It brings together prominent experts, professionals and scholars from both civil and common law jurisdictions. It represents all main legal traditions ranging from Europe (Germanic and Romanic countries, Scandinavia, ex-Socialist countries) and Russia to the Americas (North and South) and China (Mainland and Hong Kong). While addressing the main issue – the goals of civil justice – the book discusses the most topical concerns regarding the functioning and efficiency of national systems of civil justice. These include concerns such as finding the appropriate balance between accurate fact-finding and the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time, the processing of hard cases and the function of civil justice as a specific public service. In the mosaic of contrasts and oppositions special place is devoted to the continuing battle between the individualistic/liberal approach and the collectivist/paternalistic approach – the battle in which, seemingly, paternalistic tendencies regain momentum in a number of contemporary justice systems.
The present book brings together views and ideas regarding dispute resolution in modern societies from some old, some new and some future Member States of the European Union. The underlying assumption of the book is that both types of dispute resolution mechanisms û public justice and private justice û collaborate and contribute to the same goal, i.e. the establishment of a fair and effective justice system.