获得司法和“司法管辖权”:法官和陪审团权利的终结?

N. Trocker
{"title":"获得司法和“司法管辖权”:法官和陪审团权利的终结?","authors":"N. Trocker","doi":"10.3280/DC2018-003003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article illustrates the complex relationship between access to justice and \"dejudicialization\" which may be roughly translated as trend toward out of court resolution of civil disputes. The recent insistence of the Italian legislator to impose various forms of mediation, conciliation and extrajudicial negotiations as mandatory preliminary steps in many civil cases is critically evaluated and so is the trend to use the cost factor to discourage litigants to use their right to judicial protection. Concerns are raised also in relation to more sophisticated forms of \"dejudicialization\" like \"better enforcement of less law\" in consumer disputes and the shift of the enforcement architecture from state courts to \"independent authorities\" with its arguable implications on the remedial dimension of a lawsuit and the social function of the judiciary.","PeriodicalId":144000,"journal":{"name":"DIRITTO COSTITUZIONALE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accesso alla giustizia e \\\"degiurisdizionalizzazione\\\": il tramonto del diritto al giudice e al giudizio?\",\"authors\":\"N. Trocker\",\"doi\":\"10.3280/DC2018-003003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article illustrates the complex relationship between access to justice and \\\"dejudicialization\\\" which may be roughly translated as trend toward out of court resolution of civil disputes. The recent insistence of the Italian legislator to impose various forms of mediation, conciliation and extrajudicial negotiations as mandatory preliminary steps in many civil cases is critically evaluated and so is the trend to use the cost factor to discourage litigants to use their right to judicial protection. Concerns are raised also in relation to more sophisticated forms of \\\"dejudicialization\\\" like \\\"better enforcement of less law\\\" in consumer disputes and the shift of the enforcement architecture from state courts to \\\"independent authorities\\\" with its arguable implications on the remedial dimension of a lawsuit and the social function of the judiciary.\",\"PeriodicalId\":144000,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"DIRITTO COSTITUZIONALE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"DIRITTO COSTITUZIONALE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3280/DC2018-003003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DIRITTO COSTITUZIONALE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3280/DC2018-003003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

文章阐述了诉诸司法与“非司法化”之间的复杂关系,“非司法化”可以大致理解为庭外解决民事纠纷的趋势。意大利立法者最近坚持将各种形式的调解、和解和法外谈判作为许多民事案件的强制性初步步骤,这一点得到了严格的评价,而且利用成本因素阻止诉讼当事人行使其司法保护权的趋势也得到了严格的评价。人们还对更复杂的“非司法化”形式表示关注,例如消费者纠纷中的“更好地执行较少的法律”,以及执法架构从州法院转向“独立当局”,这对诉讼的补救层面和司法机构的社会功能产生了可论证的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Accesso alla giustizia e "degiurisdizionalizzazione": il tramonto del diritto al giudice e al giudizio?
The article illustrates the complex relationship between access to justice and "dejudicialization" which may be roughly translated as trend toward out of court resolution of civil disputes. The recent insistence of the Italian legislator to impose various forms of mediation, conciliation and extrajudicial negotiations as mandatory preliminary steps in many civil cases is critically evaluated and so is the trend to use the cost factor to discourage litigants to use their right to judicial protection. Concerns are raised also in relation to more sophisticated forms of "dejudicialization" like "better enforcement of less law" in consumer disputes and the shift of the enforcement architecture from state courts to "independent authorities" with its arguable implications on the remedial dimension of a lawsuit and the social function of the judiciary.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信