Adam Stankevič
{"title":"Lietuvos Didžiosios Kunigaikštystės Vyriausiojo tribunolo raštvedyba: bylų registrų knygos","authors":"Adam Stankevič","doi":"10.33918/20290705-06009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Record Keeping of the Supreme Tribunal of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: Case Registration Books\n\n\nThe article analysed case registration books of the Supreme Tribunal of the GDL in the\n16th-18th century, their structure, development, and the main issues relating to the use of these books in court practice. The oldest surviving register books date back to the mid-17th century. At that time the structure of the records had already become well-established – each page contained a brief entry at the right-hand-side corner, offering data on the parties to the proceedings (names of claimants and defendants, positions held by them or their titles) which were copied from the writ of summons of the case. This structure of each entry remained unchanged until the very end of the 18th century. The case registration books not only informed the court about the considered cases and set the order of their hearing, but also performed other functions, for example, the proceedings of the case and the court rulings were recorded there. The laws only fragmentally provided for the keeping and use of registration books, usually the corresponding requirements were only introduced in order to prevent the misconduct of litigants and clerical staff. In order to organize the work of the court more efficiently, the registration books were started to be categorised according to the nature of the cases, however, the rational way of their use was not devised. Meanwhile, the fact that some of the registration books were singled out from the common system of use led to their wrongdoings, which had a strong negative effect on the efficacy of the GDL Supreme Court and affected the Supreme Court’s ability to effectively deal with appeals and other important cases.","PeriodicalId":156509,"journal":{"name":"Istorijos šaltinių tyrimai","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Istorijos šaltinių tyrimai","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33918/20290705-06009","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

立陶宛大公国最高法院的记录保存:案件登记簿本文分析了16 -18世纪立陶宛大公国最高法院的案件登记簿,它们的结构、发展以及在法庭实践中使用这些登记簿的主要问题。现存最古老的登记簿可以追溯到17世纪中期。当时,记录的结构已经确立- -每一页的右下角都有一个简短的条目,提供诉讼各方的资料(原告和被告的姓名、他们所担任的职务或他们的头衔),这些资料是从案件的传票上抄下来的。每个入口的结构一直保持不变,直到18世纪末。案件登记簿不仅向法院通报所审议的案件和确定审理顺序,而且还履行其他职能,例如,案件的诉讼程序和法院的裁决都记录在登记簿上。法律只是零碎地规定了登记簿的保存和使用,通常只是为了防止诉讼当事人和文书工作人员的不当行为而提出相应的要求。为了更有效地组织法院的工作,开始根据案件的性质对登记簿进行分类,但是没有设计出合理的使用方法。同时,部分登记簿被从共同使用制度中挑选出来,导致其不法行为,这对GDL最高法院的效力产生了强烈的负面影响,影响了最高法院有效处理上诉和其他重要案件的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Lietuvos Didžiosios Kunigaikštystės Vyriausiojo tribunolo raštvedyba: bylų registrų knygos
Record Keeping of the Supreme Tribunal of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: Case Registration Books The article analysed case registration books of the Supreme Tribunal of the GDL in the 16th-18th century, their structure, development, and the main issues relating to the use of these books in court practice. The oldest surviving register books date back to the mid-17th century. At that time the structure of the records had already become well-established – each page contained a brief entry at the right-hand-side corner, offering data on the parties to the proceedings (names of claimants and defendants, positions held by them or their titles) which were copied from the writ of summons of the case. This structure of each entry remained unchanged until the very end of the 18th century. The case registration books not only informed the court about the considered cases and set the order of their hearing, but also performed other functions, for example, the proceedings of the case and the court rulings were recorded there. The laws only fragmentally provided for the keeping and use of registration books, usually the corresponding requirements were only introduced in order to prevent the misconduct of litigants and clerical staff. In order to organize the work of the court more efficiently, the registration books were started to be categorised according to the nature of the cases, however, the rational way of their use was not devised. Meanwhile, the fact that some of the registration books were singled out from the common system of use led to their wrongdoings, which had a strong negative effect on the efficacy of the GDL Supreme Court and affected the Supreme Court’s ability to effectively deal with appeals and other important cases.
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信