Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Vom Reichshofrat über Cocceji zu PEBB§Y: Epochenübergreifende Überlegungen zu gerichtlichen Urteils- und Vergleichsquoten aus institutionengeschichtlicher Perspektive

Vom Reichshofrat über Cocceji zu PEBB§Y: Epochenübergreifende Überlegungen zu gerichtlichen... AbstractJudicial Decision-Making from the Perspective of Institutional History. A Diachronic Comparison of Court Procedures and Amicable Settlements in the Holy Roman Empire, Prussia, and the Federal Republic of Germany. Amicable settlements were a core practice in judicial courts of the early modern period. While recent studies tend to focus on strategies of litigants, this article shifts the attention to the process of decision-making from an institutional perspective. To that end, the author examines working procedures and tools of political influencing at court using examples of civil cases at judicial courts in the Holy Roman Empire (particularly the Imperial Aulic Council), in Prussia under the reign of Frederick the Great, and in the Federal Republic of Germany. As will be shown, throughout times institutional dispositions influence the outcome of judgements and amicable settlements at least to the same degree than strategies of litigants do. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte: Germanistische Abteilung de Gruyter

Vom Reichshofrat über Cocceji zu PEBB§Y: Epochenübergreifende Überlegungen zu gerichtlichen Urteils- und Vergleichsquoten aus institutionengeschichtlicher Perspektive

Download PDF
143 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/de-gruyter/vom-reichshofrat-ber-cocceji-zu-pebb-y-epochen-bergreifende-R455E8PaLU
Publisher
de Gruyter
Copyright
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
ISSN
0323-4045
eISSN
2304-4861
DOI
10.1515/zrgg-2020-0003
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AbstractJudicial Decision-Making from the Perspective of Institutional History. A Diachronic Comparison of Court Procedures and Amicable Settlements in the Holy Roman Empire, Prussia, and the Federal Republic of Germany. Amicable settlements were a core practice in judicial courts of the early modern period. While recent studies tend to focus on strategies of litigants, this article shifts the attention to the process of decision-making from an institutional perspective. To that end, the author examines working procedures and tools of political influencing at court using examples of civil cases at judicial courts in the Holy Roman Empire (particularly the Imperial Aulic Council), in Prussia under the reign of Frederick the Great, and in the Federal Republic of Germany. As will be shown, throughout times institutional dispositions influence the outcome of judgements and amicable settlements at least to the same degree than strategies of litigants do.

Journal

Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte: Germanistische Abteilung – de Gruyter

Published: Aug 25, 2020

There are no references for this article.