Approaches to Procedural Law (eBook)

Cover 1
Inaugural Lecture 13
I. Comparative Perspectives in Procedural Law: Some Remarks and Proposals 15
(I) Introduction 15
(II) The Scope of Comparison in Procedural Law 17
(a) Comparing the Regulation of Civil Proceedings 17
(b) Comparing Court Proceedings and ADR Mechanisms 19
(c) Comparing Civil Procedure and Criminal Procedure 21
(III) The Aims and Purposes of Applying Comparative Methodology in Procedural Law 24
(a) Comparing to Improve National Legislation 25
(b) Comparing to Harmonize Legislation 30
(c) Comparing to Act in a Globalized World 36
(IV) How Should Procedural Comparison Be Carried out? 37
(a) Choosing the Terms of Comparison 37
(b) The Information Needed and the Way to Gather It 40
(c) The Language Issues 43
II. Comparative Law: A Plurality of Methods 47
(I) Introduction 47
(II) What is Comparative Law? 48
(III) What Are the Methods of Comparative Law? 51
(IV) The Critique of Comparative Law 54
(V) The Next Iteration of Comparative Law? 57
(VI) Development of Comparative Procedural Law 61
Procedural Law and Methodology 65
I. Mauro Cappelletti’s Methodology in Comparative Civil Justice and the Coercive Powers of Courts as a Case Study 67
(I) Comparative Law in Theory – on Comparative Methodology 67
(a) Introduction. On The “Constitutive Tension” Between Similarities and Differences in Comparative Legal Studies. Comparative Law in Theory – on Comparative Methodology 67
(b) Mauro Cappelletti’s Comparative Law 70
(c) A Closer Look: The Stages of the Comparative Law Research 74
(d) An Epistemic Critique 77
(II) Comparative law in practice – on the coercive powers of courts in comparative perspective 80
(a) Introduction 80
(b) In Search of the Common Need 83
(c) Explaining the Differences: a Cultural Approach 86
(III) Conclusion – Is Jacques Derrida right? 90
II. Beware of Legal Families: The Example of the Effects of Res Judicata Toward Third Parties 93
(I) Introduction 93
(II) The “Continental Paradox” 96
(a) Common Roots: Roman Ambiguities 96
(i) The Definition of the Exceptio Rei Judicatae 97
(ii) The Locus Standi of Third Parties to Appeal 97
(b) Modern Hesitations 98
(i) A Uniform Definition of Res Judicata 98
(ii) Different Approaches Concerning the Impact on Third Parties 100
1. Countries Where Third Party Remedy Against the Judgment Exists 100
2. Countries Without a Third Party Remedy Against the Judgment 102
(III) The ‘’Common Law Diversity’’ 104
(a) The Common Roots: “Res Judicata”, “Estoppel by Record” and the Lack of Effect Toward Third Parties 104
(i) The Basic Concepts 104
(ii) Parties Bound by the Judgment 106
(b) Subsequent Developments: Increasing Divergence Between American and English Law 107
(i) American Law: Admission of Non-Mutual Collateral Estoppel 107
(b) English Law: The Rise of “Abuse of Process” 109
(IV) An Attempt at Synthesis 113
(a) A first Conclusion: the Necessity of Going beyond the Legal Families 113
(b) Discussion of Two Specific Issues 114
(i) Judgment about the Validity of a Patent 114
(ii) Judgment on the Liability of a Tortfeasor Who Inflicted Harm to Many Victims 116
(V) Conclusion 119
III. Statistical Methods in Comparative Civil Procedure – Chances and Risks Christoph A. Kern 121
(I) Introduction 121
(II) Terminology 124
(III) Quantitative Methods in Comparative Law 125
(a) Empirical Research on Legal Systems in General 125
(b) Particularities of the “Numerical Comparative Law” Studies 127
(c) The Siems Guidelines 128
(IV) The Importance of Transparency and Caution 129
(V) “Numerical Comparative Law” and Civil Procedure 131
(a) The Special Case of Procedural Law 131
(b) The Intricacies of Measuring the Quality of Civil Justice 132
(c) The Lex Mundi Study “Courts” and its Follow-Up Paper 133
1. The Lex Mundi Study 133
2. The Follow-Up Paper 134
(d) Some Evaluating Remarks on these Studies 135
1. The Lex Mundi Study 135
2. The Follow-Up Paper 137
(VI) The Studies’ Use and Understanding of Comparative Law 138
(a) Comparative Law Literature and Quantitative Studies 138
(b) Illustration: The Lex Mundi Study “Courts” 139
(VII) Conclusion 143
On the Role of the Courts 145
The Changing Role of Courts between the Privatization of Adjudication and the Privatization of Procedure 147
(I) Introduction: Privatizing Adjudication and Privatizing Procedure 147
(II) Procedural Contracts 150
(III) A Short Comparative Approach 152
(a) Comparative Law Methodology 152
(b) Prototypical Cases 154
(i) Germany 154
(ii) France 157
(iii) Italy 159
(iv) Brazil 161
(v) United States 162
(IV) Preliminary Points of Analysis 164
(a) Why Have Procedural Agreements at All? 164
(b) Managerial Judging and Procedural Agreements 166
(c) Historical Background and the Uniqueness of Procedural Agreements 167
(V) Empirical Research and the Two Privatizations 168
(a) The Importance of Empirical Analysis of the Privatization of Adjudication 168
(b) Future Research Proposal 170
National Procedural Law 173
I. The Italian Assisted Negotiation for Legal Separation and Divorce 175
(I) Methodology and Introduction to the Theme 175
(II) Family Law in the Italian System 178
(III) Law 10th November 2014 N. 162: A General Overview 182
(IV) The Assisted Negotiations for Legal Separation and Divorce 187
(V) The Procedure of Assisted Negotiation for Legal Separation and Divorce: An Analytical Illustration. 198
(VI) Personal remarks 206
(VII) Conclusion 209
II. The Impact of the EU Financial Crisis in the Europeanization of the Greek Civil Procedural Law: A Multi-Methodological Insight to the New Greek Civil Procedure Code (2015), its Scope and Innovative Provisions 211
(I) Introduction 211
(II) The Historical Context of the Civil Judicial Reform in Greece and the Establishment of the New Greek Civil Procedure Code (2015) 213
(a) Greece in the Storm of the EU Financial Crisis 214
(b) The Way to the Establishment of the New Greek Civil Procedure Code 219
(III) The Scope of the New Greek Civil Procedure Code (2015) 221
(a) The Need for the Acceleration of Civil Trial Proceedings 222
(b) The Three Pillars of the Scope of the New Greek Civil Procedure Code 226
(i) The Issuance of Sound, Fair and Quick Civil Judgments 227
(ii) The Adoption of Judicial Economy in Civil Trial 228
(iii) The Fulfillment of the Right to Judicial Protection 229
(IV) The Main Amendments of the New Greek Civil Procedure Code (2015) 231
(a) The Categorization of the Amendments of the New Greek Civil Procedure Code 232
(i) The New Ordinary Proceedings before the Courts of First Instance 232
(ii) The Reformation of the Special Proceedings and the Changes in the Payment Order 234
(iii) The Modifications in the Interim Proceedings Regarding Precautionary Measures 236
(iv) The Amendments in the Compulsory Civil Enforcement Procedure 237
(b) A “European” Approach to the Most Innovative Provisions of the New Greek Civil Procedure Code 239
(i) The Establishment of Judicial Economy as a Fundamental Principle of the Civil Trial 239
(ii) The Promotion of ADR Methods 240
(iii) The Establishment of a New System for the Concentration of the Litigants’ Claims 242
(iv) The Deployment of Technological Innovation 244
(V) Conclusion: Towards the Europeanization of the Greek Civil Procedural Law? Problems, Challenges and Prospects 245
III. Supreme Courts: “Filters’’ and the Case Selection. Argentina’s Writ of Certiorari in a Comparative Perspective 249
(I) Presentation 249
(II) Overview of Argentina’s Supreme Court and Federal Judiciary System. The Fusion of Two “Legal Traditions” 251
(III) The Two Dimensions of the Supreme Courts’ Crisis 253
(a) “Quantitative” Dimension 253
(b) “Qualitative” Dimension 255
(IV) Mechanisms to Address the Crisis 257
(a) “Overproduction” Mechanisms 257
(b) Case Selection Mechanisms 259
(V) The Requirement of “relevance” (trascendencia) in an Extraordinary Appeal at the Federal Supreme Court (Argentina) 261
(a) Partial Discretion 261
(b) No Motivation 262
(c) Parameters to select by “transcendence”. Relevance, institutional roles and the Argentinian approach to the “ius litigatoris dilemma”. 262
International Courts 267
I. The Court of the Eurasian Economic Union: Basic and Some Controversial Questions of Jurisdiction and Procedure 269
(I) Introduction 269
(II) Structure and Composition of the Court, Questions and Independence 271
(a) Nomination of Judges and Terms of Tenure 271
(b) Removal from the Office 275
(c) Immunities 277
(d) Composition of Panels and Presidency 280
(III) Jurisdiction of the Court 285
(a) Direct Actions 285
(i) On the Claim (request) of a Member State 285
(ii) On the Claim (request) of an Economic Entity 288
(b) Interpretation on the Union Law, Civil Service Issues 290
(c) Waived Competence of Preliminary Rulings 291
(IV) Conclusion 294
II. The Court of Justice of the European Union as an Institutional Model for the African Court of Justice and Human Rights 295
(I) Introduction 295
(II) The Reform of the AU’s Judicial System 297
(a) The Rationalization as a Goal 297
(b) The EU’s Institutional Support 299
(III) The CJEU’S Jurisdiction as a Model 303
(a) The Question of Multiple Jurisdictions of the ACtJHR. 303
(b) The Jurisdiction of the General Affairs Section and the European Model 309
(i) Advisory Jurisdiction 310
(ii) Jurisdiction in Constitutional Issues Arising from the Institutional Structure of the Organization 312
(iii) Jurisdiction to Deal with Any Issues of International Law 312
(iv) Staff Appeals 316
(v) Other Competences? 317
(IV) The CJEU’s Procedural Rules as a Model 318
(a) The Number, Eligibility and Required Expertise of Judges 318
(b) Enforcement Mechanism 322
(V) Conclusion 324
III. When Titans Clash: Setting Standards for Child Abduction by the CJEU and the ECtHR 327
(I) Introduction 327
(II) The Approach of the CJEU to the “Automatic Return” Principle 329
(III) The Position of the ECtHR 331
(IV) A “Non Mechanical” Return? The Neulinger Case 332
(V) A Procedural “Compromise”: the Povse v. Austria Case and its Progeny 335
(VI) Concluding Remarks 340
Collective Redress 343
I. Collective Due Process of Law: Reconciling Representation and Participation 345
(I) The Matter 345
(II) Participation and Due Process of Law 346
(III) Outcome-based Approaches and Process-based Approaches 349
(a) Would the Process Survive without Participation? Critique to the Notion of Essential Participation. 351
(b) Would the Process Survive Without Participation? Critique to the Notion of Instrumental Participation 355
(IV) A New Concept of ??Procedural Participation 357
(V) Who is Entitled to Collective Rights? 359
(VI) The Concept of Society 362
(VII) The Species of Collective Disputes 365
(a) Global collective disputes 367
(b) Local Collective Disputes 369
(c) Irradiated Collective Disputes 371
(VIII) A Procedural Model for Collective Disputes 375
(a) The Process in Global Disputes 376
(b) The Process in Local Disputes 379
(c) The Process in Irradiated Disputes 381
(IX) Conclusion 389
II. Access to Justice of Disadvantaged Groups and Judicial Control of Public Policies through Class Actions in Argentina 391
(I) Research Project 391
(II) Introduction 392
(III) Class Actions in Argentina 394
(a) General Constitutional and Statutory Overview 394
(b) Case Law General Overview: The Halabi Case and its Progeny 397
(c) SCJA Administrative Regulations 401
(IV) Barriers on Access to Justice 403
(a) Economic Barriers 403
(b) Cultural Barriers and the Complexity of Modern Law 404
(c) A Dangerous Combination 406
(V) Access to Justice, Class Actions and Disadvantaged Groups 407
(a) Access to Justice as One of the Main Goals of Class Actions 407
(b) Access to Justice and Disadvantaged Groups of People 408
(VI) The Scope of “Case or Controversy” Doctrine and its Influence on Judicial Review of Public Policies through Class Actions 409
(VII) Provisional Conclusions 413
III. Financial Consumer Redress by ADR and ODR. New European Approaches 415
(I) Introduction 415
(II) Financial ADR Mechanisms 416
(III) Financial Ombudsman Complaint-Handling Procedure 418
(a) Differences between the English System and the Spanish System 418
(b) Internal Dispute Resolution Scheme 420
(c) External Dispute Resolution Scheme 421
(i) Defensor del Cliente (Customer Ombudsman) 421
(ii) Market Conduct and Claims Department (Financial Ombudsman) 422
(iii) Funding Scheme 426
(IV) The Importance of the Networking of ADR Financial Institutions: Fin-Net 428
(a) Development of ADR on Cross-Border Disputes Resolution 429
(b) Fin-Net 430
(V) ADR/ODR as EU Binomial Solution for Consumer Conflicts: Controversial Aspects 432
(a) Nominal Fee for Consumers 433
(b) Pre-specified Monetary Thresholds 434
(VI) Improvement Proposals 434
(a) The Removal of the Spanish Institution Defensor del Cliente 434
(b) Single Financial ADR Body 435
(c) Final Decisions with (Half)-Binding Effects 436
(VII) Conclusions 436
(a) Financial Consumer Protection is essential to guarantee the Market Stability 437
(b) The Customer Care Departments or IDR Schemes are not Out-of-Court Settlement of Consumer Disputes Procedures in the proper Sense 437
(c) The Financial Ombudsman is an ADR Category of its Own 438
IV. Eduardo J. Couture. Footmarks that Help in Understanding the Present 441
Arbitration and ADR/ODR 451
I. The Theory and Practice of Precedent in Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods 453
(I) Introduction 453
(II) The Special Nature of CISG Arbitration Case Law 455
(III) Criteria for CISG Arbitral Precedents 461
(IV) Uniform Application of CISG 463
(V) Conclusion 467
II. When Forward-Looking Aspect of Precedent Justifies Immediate Formally Binding Decisions 477
(I) Introduction 477
(II) The Idea of the Forward-Looking Aspect 478
(III) Professor Schauer’s Thesis 479
(IV) Professor Schauer’s Erroneous Premise 482
(V) When Forward-Looking Aspect of Precedent Justifies Formally Binding Immediate Decisions: The Brazilian Example 488
(VI) Conclusion 490
III. Some Remarks about Collective Procedural Law and the New Brazilian Civil Procedure Code 491
(I) Introduction: a Brief Panorama of Collective Procedural Law 491
(II) The Kind of Collective Protection 495
(III) The Role of the Collective Procedure 496
(IV) The Collective Protection as a Fundamental or Constitutional Right 496
(V) Requirements, Protection of the Absent Members and Different Methods and Representation 497
(VI) The Frame of the Collective Procedural Law and its Paths. A multi-door perspective 498
(VII) The New Brazilian Civil Procedure Code 500
(VIII) Final Questions 505
Meeting Points: International, European, Domestic Procedural Law 507
I. Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions in Domestic Courts – Union Law Requirements on the locus standi of Individuals 509
(I) Presentation and Legal Framework 509
(II) The Principles at Play: Equivalence, Effectiveness, and Effective Judicial Protection 511
(III) Standing to Challenge Administrative Decisions 515
(a) Introduction 515
(b) Standing of Private Parties – Rights Protection or Effectiveness? 516
(c) The Existence of a Right Deriving From Union Law 519
(d) Adverse Effects on the Applicant 522
(e) Vested and Present Interest 529
(IV) Discussion and Final Remarks 531
II. Procedural Law and Global Governance: Exploring and Mapping a New Research Field 535
(I) “Sentry” 535
(II) With the Eyes of a Stranger 536
(III) A View from Procedural Law 538
(IV) Procedural Law and Global Governance: Towards a Workable Research Agenda 538
(V) The Silence of Procedural Law Literature 539
(VI) Misleading Perceptions 540
(VII) Janus-Faced Civil Procedure 541
(VIII) The Case for Procedural Law 542
(IX) Roadmap of the Research Project 543
(a) Domestic and international courts and transnational governance. The working hypothesis aims to establish whether there are symptoms of an ‘over-judicialization’. 543
(b) Use of indicators (and big data) as a tool to evaluate and compare judicial systems. 545
(X) Aim of the Research Project 546
Index 547